Dispersal and retention of larval fish in a potential nursery habitat of a large temperate river: an experimental study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Little information is available on governing factors of larval fish dispersal in natural river systems. Therefore, we aimed to describe dispersal and retention of marked larval nase carp, Chondrostoma nasus , along a shoreline nursery habitat of the River Danube. Based on a three-dimensional hydrodynamic model, we analyzed the influence of the hydraulic conditions on larval dispersal. We also related observed larval pathways to numerical particle tracing. Clear differences in the temporal drift pattern were due to significant differences in the hydrodynamic characteristics of the release stations. Some larvae remained in the study reach, most upstream of the release point. These were significantly larger than drifting larvae. We conclude that larval dispersal has an active component and that dispersal and retention patterns are dependent on the habitat structure and hydrodynamic characteristics of the releasing points. This emphasizes the importance of links between the location of spawning sites within the river and variation in flow during early development, the combination of which may contribute to successful recruitment of fluvial fish species.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".