Maternal transfer of carbon and nitrogen to progeny of sea-run and resident brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Early-life history characteristics of sea-run and resident salmonid fishes that co-exist in sympatry are poorly understood. To assess differences in characteristics of offspring of these two strategies following their emergence to the stream, stable isotope ratios (δ13C and δ15N) were used to identify the progeny of resident and sea-run female brook trout ( Salvelinus fontinalis ) in a tributary of the Miramichi River, New Brunswick, Canada. Upon emergence, sea-run progeny captured in emergence traps were longer, heavier, and had higher carbon to nitrogen ratios (C/N, an indicator of lipid content) than resident progeny, but did not have a higher body condition. After some feeding and growth in the stream, sea-run progeny (still identifiable by their δ13C and δ15N) captured in dip-nets became longer, heavier, had higher C/N, and had higher condition than resident progeny. The proportion of fish caught in dip nets at sites where the two forms co-existed was dominated by offspring of sea-run females (sea-run = 56%, resident = 19%, unknown = 25%). These analyses suggest that offspring of sea-run, female trout benefit from maternally derived energy reserves gained at sea and thus have potential adaptive advantages over offspring of residents.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".