Habitat selection by juvenile coho salmon in response to food and woody debris manipulations in suburban and rural stream sections
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study explored the effects of food and woody debris manipulations on the summer distribution of juvenile coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch) in small suburban streams. To examine fish responses to these factors, three different experiments were carried out in modified sections of two streams. The results showed that the distribution of juvenile coho salmon in a stream section was primarily controlled by the availability and distribution of food among pools and by the presence and density of woody debris. Food, however, played a dominant role because the foraging quality of a pool not only affected the density of fish in it but also the response of those fish towards instream debris. In food-rich stream sections, low proportions of juvenile coho salmon occupied pools with dense woody debris in the spring, which changed towards late summer. In contrast, in food-poor reaches, high proportions of fish were found in pools with abundant debris in the spring. Pools that combined abundant food with sparse woody debris were the most favoured by the fish. It is important that salmonid habitat enhancement projects consider that open foraging areas interspersed with woody debris characterize the type of summer habitat that juvenile coho salmon prefer.
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".