The ‘natural flow paradigm’ and Atlantic salmon—moving from concept to practice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The ‘natural flow paradigm’ is becoming an important first principle in the setting of managed flow regimes throughout the world, including Canada. The principle states that managed flow regimes should consider the natural hydrological variability of a river system, both seasonally and interannually, to maintain its ecological integrity. While laudable, this principle is in direct conflict with hydropower development and irrigation interests. Therefore, both regulatory agencies and developers are struggling to identify the elements of hydrological variability that are critical to maintain the ecological health of rivers. In this paper, we identify flow requirements for different life stages of anadromous Atlantic salmon (Salmo salarL.). We then explore the potential effects of different flow regime scenarios on a wild Atlantic salmon population, using Harry's River in Western Newfoundland as an example. First, we link the life history patterns of Atlantic salmon to the scenario of the natural hydrological variability, incorporating the flow requirements for migration, spawning and rearing. In a second scenario, we present a flow regime managed for optimal hydropower production. Finally, we propose a conceptual model for a hypothetical managed flow regime that provides the necessary hydrological flow variations to support the life history requirements of Atlantic salmon, while permitting flow regulation and modification. This exercise identified data gaps and further research needs. Particularly, more information is needed on the amplitude of spring flooding necessary to initiate downstream migration while minimizing spill, which could potential be used for hydropower production. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 | 0.012 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.034 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".