Enriched rearing improves survival of hatchery-reared Atlantic salmon smolts during migration in the River Tornionjoki
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Low survival of stocked fish has been associated with fitness declines of the captive reared fishes because of genetic domestication and unnatural rearing environments. The effects of broodstock origin (wild or captive) or rearing method (standard or enriched) on survival and migration of hatchery-reared Atlantic salmon smolts (Salmo salar) were investigated in the Tornionjoki River using radiotelemetry. Smolts that were reared with enriched methods had a twofold increase in survival (∼38%) compared with smolts that had been reared in a standard hatchery environment (∼19%). Nature-caught smolts had highest survival (∼57%). Smolts from enriched rearing had a higher initial migration speed than fish from standard rearing. Initial migration speed during the first 3 km was positively correlated to survival probability after 290 km for hatchery fish. There was no clear effect of origin on survival or migration speed. The results of this study show that enriching the rearing environment with methods easily applicable to large-scale production promotes smolt survival and migration speed during river migration, which is imperative for stocking success.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".