Performance of farmed, hybrid, and wild Atlantic salmon (<i>Salmo salar</i>) families in a natural river environment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Survival, growth, and diet were compared for farmed, hybrid, and wild Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) families from the eyed egg to the smolt stage in River Guddalselva, Hardangerfjord, Norway. All individuals that survived until the smolt stage were captured in a Wolf trap and identified to one of the 69 experimental families using microsatellite markers. Survival of farmed salmon progeny was significantly lower than that of hybrids and wild progeny. However, survival varied considerably, from 0.17% to 6.4%, among farmed families. Egg size had an important influence on survival. Half-sib hybrid families with a farmed mother had higher survival when fathered by wild salmon than by farmed salmon. The overall relative survival of farmed families compared with that of their hybrid half-sib families fell from 0.86 in the second cohort to 0.62 in the last cohort with increasing fish density. Smolts of farmed parents showed significantly higher growth rates than wild and hybrid smolts. The overlap in diet among types of crosses demonstrates competition, and farm and hybrid progeny therefore will reduce the river’s capacity for production of wild salmon.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".