Poor Survival of Acoustically‐Tagged Juvenile Chinook Salmon in the Strait of Georgia, British Columbia, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The collapse of the commercial fishery and the major decline in catches in the recreational fishery for Chinook Salmon Oncorhynchus tshawytscha in the Strait of Georgia since the mid‐1990s represents a major economic loss to British Columbia. Early marine residence is critical for survival of Chinook Salmon, but measuring the amount of mortality has been difficult. Acoustic tags can be used to measure marine mortality and study migratory behavior. We surgically implanted 278 juvenile Chinook Salmon with acoustic tags to monitor when and how many tagged fish moved out of the Strait of Georgia. Only eight tagged fish were detected leaving the Strait of Georgia, indicating that there could have been substantial mortality of the tagged juvenile Chinook Salmon within the strait. Tagging mortality was minimal, and the detection of tags was shown not to be a major source of error in this study. A major change in population structure between the spring and fall tagging periods meant that it was unlikely that most of the fish tagged in June and July remained within the Strait of Georgia. The decline in abundance of juvenile Chinook Salmon in November 2008 also indicates that the lack of detections of all tagged fish is unlikely a consequence of fish remaining in the Strait of Georgia. This information and the low catches in winter surveys indicated that most juvenile Chinook salmon were no longer in the strait in the late fall and winter. If the tagged fish were representative of the untagged fish, the current brood‐year strength probably is largely determined within the Strait of Georgia. Received January 31, 2014; accepted July 31, 2014
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".