Effects of Increased Discharge on Spawning and Age-0 Recruitment of Rainbow Trout in the Colorado River at Lees Ferry, Arizona
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Negative interactions of Rainbow Trout Oncorhynchus mykiss with endangered Humpback Chub Gila cypha pose challenges to the operation of Glen Canyon Dam (GCD) to manage for both species in the Colorado River. Operations to enhance the Rainbow Trout tailwater fishery may lead to an increase in downstream movement of the trout to areas where they are likely to interact with Humpback Chub. We evaluated the effects of dam operations on age-0 Rainbow Trout in the tailwater fishery to inform managers about how GCD operations could benefit a tailwater fishery for Rainbow Trout; although this could affect a Humpback Chub population farther downstream. A near year-long increase in discharge at GCD in 2011 enabled us to evaluate whether high and stable flows led to increased spawning and production of age-0 Rainbow Trout compared with other years. Rainbow Trout spawning was monitored by fitting a model to observed redd counts to estimate the number of redds created over a spawning season. Data collected during electrofishing trips in July–September and November were used to acquire age-0 trout population and mortality rate estimates. We found that high and stable flows in 2011 resulted in 3,062 redds (1.7 times the mean of all survey years) and a population estimate of 686,000 age-0 Rainbow Trout (second highest on record). Despite high initial abundance, mortality remained low through the year (0.0043%/d) resulting in significant recruitment with a record high November population estimate of 214,000 age-0 Rainbow Trout. Recent monitoring indicates this recruitment event was followed by an increase in downstream migration, which may lead to increased interactions with downstream populations of Humpback Chub. Consequently, while our results indicate that manipulating flow at GCD can be used to manage Rainbow Trout spawning and recruitment, fisheries managers should use flow manipulation in moderation to minimize downstream migration in order to reduce negative interactions with other species in the Colorado River. Received September 8, 2014; accepted March 28, 2015
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".