MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1964494841 · doi:10.1139/f07-111

Numerical changes in stream-resident brown trout (<i>Salmo trutta</i>): uncovering the roles of density-dependent and density-independent factors across space and time

2007· article· en· W1964494841 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Javier Lobón‐Cerviá

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSalmoBrown troutTributaryDensity dependencePopulation densityContext (archaeology)HabitatEcologyTroutPopulationGeographyBiologyEnvironmental scienceFisheryFish <Actinopterygii>DemographyCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective was to uncover the roles of environmental, density-independent, and intrinsic, density-dependent factors as drivers of population size in stream-resident brown trout (Salmo trutta) across space and time. The study was based on census data and environmental variables collected every fourth month over 1986–2006 at 12 sites selected along four Rio Esva tributaries (northwestern Spain). Density-dependent hypotheses involving the operation of current and lagged densities on recruitment and subsequent spawner density were analyzed at three increasingly larger geographical scales (site, stream, and river drainage). No evidence supported these hypotheses, suggesting an overall lack of negative feedbacks among year classes. Stream discharge in March when trout emerge and site depth explained substantial amounts of spatiotemporal variation in recruitment. The effects of these two factors on recruitment were sufficiently strong to be detected in year-class mortality and subsequent spawner density. Discharge and site depth determine the amount of spatial habitat suitable for sized individuals during their lifetime and, hence, the maximum number of individuals across space and time. Recruitment dependence, as a delayed density-dependent factor, adjusts the numbers in excess to the numbers established by spatial habitat. These findings differ markedly from the prediction of the most recent theories of population dynamics and are discussed in this context.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations77
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic SciencesSame topicFish Ecology and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207