MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1874300170 · doi:10.1139/cjfas-2012-0205

Predicting climate change effects on subarctic–Arctic populations of Atlantic salmon (<i>Salmo salar</i>)

2013· article· en· W1874300170 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Richard D. Hedger, Line Elisabeth Sundt-Hansen, Torbjørn Forseth, Ola Ugedal, Ola H. Diserud, Ånund Sigurd Kvambekk, Anders G. Finstad

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubarctic climateSalmoFish migrationArcticClimate changeEnvironmental scienceSmoltificationSalmonidaeNorthern HemisphereFisheryGlobal warmingEcologyOceanographyClimatologyFish <Actinopterygii>BiologyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We predict an increase in parr recruitment and smolt production of Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) populations along a climate gradient from the subarctic to the Arctic in western and northern Norway in response to future climate change. Firstly, we predicted local stream temperature and discharge from downscaled data obtained from Global Climate Models. Then, we developed a spatially explicit individual-based model (IBM) parameterized for the freshwater stage, with combinations of three different postsmolt survival probabilities reflecting different marine survival regimes. The IBM was run for three locations: southern Norway (∼59°N), western Norway (∼62°N), and northern Norway (∼70°N). Increased temperatures under the future climate regimes resulted in faster parr growth, earlier smolting, and elevated smolt production in the western and northern locations, in turn leading to increased egg deposition and elevated recruitment into parr. In the southern location, density-dependent mortality of parr resulting from low summer wetted-areas reduced predicted future smolt production in comparison to the other locations. It can be inferred, therefore, that climate change may have both positive and negative effects on anadromous fish abundance within the subarctic–Arctic according to geographical region.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.217
Threshold uncertainty score0.431

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.197 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations40
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences→Same topicFish Ecology and Management Studies→French-language works237,207→