Estimating reach-specific fish movement probabilities in rivers with a Bayesian state-space model: application to sea lamprey passage and capture at dams
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Improved methods are needed to evaluate barriers and traps for control and assessment of invasive sea lamprey (Petromyzon marinus) in the Great Lakes. A Bayesian state-space model provided reach-specific probabilities of movement, including trap capture and dam passage, for 148 acoustic tagged invasive sea lamprey in the lower Cheboygan River, Michigan, a tributary to Lake Huron. Reach-specific movement probabilities were combined to obtain estimates of spatial distribution and abundance needed to evaluate a barrier and trap complex for sea lamprey control and assessment. Of an estimated 21 828 – 29 300 adult sea lampreys in the river, 0%–2%, or 0–514 untagged lampreys, could have passed upstream of the dam, and 46%–61% were caught in the trap. Although no tagged lampreys passed above the dam (0/148), our sample size was not sufficient to consider the lock and dam a complete barrier to sea lamprey. Results also showed that existing traps are in good locations because 83%–96% of the population was vulnerable to existing traps. However, only 52%–69% of lampreys vulnerable to traps were caught, suggesting that traps can be improved. The approach used in this study was a novel use of Bayesian state-space models that may have broader applications, including evaluation of barriers for other invasive species (e.g., Asian carp (Hypophthalmichthys spp.)) and fish passage structures for other diadromous fishes.
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 | 0.006 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".