MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1988561261 · doi:10.1038/srep00448

Estuarine and early-marine survival of transported and in-river migrant Snake River spring Chinook salmon smolts

2012· article· en· W1988561261 on OpenAlexaff
Erin L. Rechisky, David W. Welch, Aswea D. Porter, Melinda C. Jacobs-Scott, Paul Winchell, John LeRoy McKern

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsKintama (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChinook windJuvenileFisheryOncorhynchusEstuarySpring (device)Environmental scienceFish <Actinopterygii>SmoltificationHydroelectricityDischargeDrainage basinSalmonidaeOceanographyGeographyBiologyEcologySalmoGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many juvenile Snake River Chinook salmon are transported downriver to avoid hydroelectric dams in the Columbia River basin. As mortality to the final dam is ∼50%, transported fish should return as adults at roughly double the rate of nontransported fish; however, the benefit of transportation has not been realized consistently. "Delayed" mortality caused by transportation-induced stress is one hypothesis to explain reduced returns of transported fish. Differential timing of ocean entry is another. We used a large-scale acoustic telemetry array to test whether survival of transported juvenile spring Chinook is reduced relative to in-river migrant control groups after synchronizing ocean entry timing. During the initial 750 km, 1 month long migration after release, we found no evidence of decreased estuarine or ocean survival of transported groups; therefore, decreased survival to adulthood for transported Chinook is likely caused by factors other than delayed effects of transportation, such as earlier ocean entry.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations24
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific Reports→Same topicFish Ecology and Management Studies→French-language works237,207→