Anthropogenic and habitat correlates of hybridization between hatchery and wild brook trout
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Human activities are breaking down barriers to interpopulation hybridization with results that range from populations that resist introgression to populations at serious risk of genetic extinction, particularly between wild and hatchery fish because of the routine stocking of lakes and streams containing wild populations. We investigated whether specific human actions and (or) habitat characteristics were associated with the extent of hybridization between hatchery and wild brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) occupying lakes in Algonquin Park, Ontario, Canada. Hatchery and wild trout tended to hybridize more in lakes (i) supporting smaller populations (i.e., having lower pH and situated at higher elevations), (ii) stocked earlier in the season, and (iii) with greater exposure to other human activities (fishing). Our results highlight how particular human activities may interact with specific habitat conditions to elicit hybridization in wild populations. Hence, the use of readily available habitat and land use data may provide an economical means of anticipating hybridization or identifying indigenous populations with minimal introgression.
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 | 0.000 | 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".