Does fine sediment constrain salmonid alevin development and survival?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We applied a randomized factorial design with three sedimentation treatments (high, low, and zero sediment addition) and two predation-risk levels (predator present or absent) to assess whether the survival and emergence of brown trout (Salmo trutta) alevins were affected by sedimentation and (or) chemical cues from a predatory fish (burbot, Lota lota). In this laboratory experiment, survival was only related to the finest organic sediment fraction (<0.074 mm), which decreased embryo survival, although only constituting less than 1.5% of all sediments. Control fish tended to postpone emergence when exposed to predator odour, whereas fish in the high-sedimentation treatment showed no response to predators. Alevins that received high sedimentation had larger yolk sacs at emergence compared with control fish. Sedimentation may thus have serious fitness consequences on salmonids, as fry with larger yolk sacs are poor swimmers and therefore more vulnerable to predation or downstream displacement. Fine-sediment deposition from the catchment or stream banks may cause a serious threat to salmonid populations, and more effective erosion control is needed to reduce inputs of fine sediments to river habitats.
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 | 0.000 | 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".