The Synchronous Failure of Juvenile Pacific Salmon and Herring Production in the Strait of Georgia in 2007 and the Poor Return of Sockeye Salmon to the Fraser River in 2009
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Trawl studies from 1998 to 2009 indicated that juvenile Pacific salmon Oncorhynchus spp. and Pacific herring Clupea pallasii represented 98% of the fish in the surface waters of the Strait of Georgia during the day in the spring and early summer. Standardized catches of all juvenile Pacific salmon in the trawl surveys were lowest in 2007. Catches of young-of-the-year Pacific herring were also extremely low in 2007. Three years later, the 2007 year-class had the lowest recruitment to the fishery in recorded history. In 2007, juvenile coho salmon O. kisutch and Chinook salmon O. tshawytscha were small and had the lowest condition of the fish in all surveys as well as a high percentage of empty stomachs. The early marine survival of coho salmon in 2007 and the total survival in 2008 were exceptionally poor. Trawl catches of juvenile chum salmon O. keta in 2007 were the lowest of all surveys. Adult chum salmon from these juveniles that returned in 2010 had extremely poor survival. Juvenile sockeye salmon O. nerka that entered the Strait of Georgia in the spring of 2007 and returned to the Fraser River as adults in 2009 also had such exceptionally poor marine survival that a judicial inquiry was conducted to determine the causes. The synchronous poor growth, survival, or both of all of the major species in the surface waters of the Strait of Georgia in the spring of 2007 indicated that there was a common cause which we propose as poor food production. The causes of the high mortality likely represented a unique extreme in the variability of the factors that normally affect the survival of juvenile Pacific salmon and Pacific herring in the early marine period in the Strait of Georgia. Received September 27, 2011; accepted March 8, 2012
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".