MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Brown trout spawning habitat selection preferences and redd characteristics in the Credit River, Ontario

2006· article· en· W1969312727 on OpenAlexaffabout
Manuel Zimmer, Michael Power

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Fish Biology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBrown troutHabitatSalmoBiologyRiffleTroutFisheryEcologyContext (archaeology)Fish <Actinopterygii>

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Brown trout Salmo trutta redds in the Credit River, Ontario, were enumerated and assessed for physical, location and cover feature characteristics during the 2002 spawning season. Hydraulic habitats were classified on the basis of channel morphology and availability recorded. Combined use and availability data were used to assess habitat selection preferences and test for significant differences. Significant preferences for upstream pool and riffle habitat were found, but all available habitat types were used to some degree. Non‐preferred habitat redds were significantly larger than those located in preferred habitats and more likely to be found in association with woody debris cover. Larger redds were interpreted as indicative of larger fish. The use of non‐preferred downstream habitats by larger fish was further interpreted in the context of overwinter habitat requirements to reflect possible trade‐offs between reproductive and adult over‐winter survival requirements resulting in the selection of habitat for multiple life‐history functions. Results suggest that redd density alone should not be used to infer critical autumn habitat requirements for brown trout.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.201
Threshold uncertainty score0.811

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations51
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Fish BiologySame topicFish Ecology and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207