The importance of Colorado River flow to nursery habitats of the Gulf corvina <i>(Cynoscion othonopterus)</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We test the hypothesis that Colorado River flow is important in providing nursery habitat for the Gulf corvina (Cynoscion othonopterus), a commercially valuable and endemic fish in the upper Gulf of California. We use oxygen isotopes in otoliths to determine when these fish inhabit isotopically different bodies of water (Gulf of California versus the Colorado Estuary). The δ18O values in the natal otoliths of C. othonopterus, significantly more negative than can be predicted by temperature alone, provide evidence that this species uses the brackish habitats created by flow of the Colorado River. A significant log-linear relationship between the natal δ18O values and the cumulative flow of the Colorado River during natal development confirms use of brackish habitat in years that the Colorado River water reached the Gulf. Natal δ18O values indicate that C. othonopterus seek out estuarine habitats with salinities between 26 and 38. Reduction in Colorado River flow since the construction of upstream dams has reduced the size of nursery habitat for C. othonopterus. Our results support the hypothesis that declines in commercial landings can be at least partially attributed to reduced river flow. Increased flow would increase nursery habitat and likely benefit recruitment.
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".