MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1991660775 · doi:10.1139/f10-073

The effect of a supplementation program on the genetic and life history characteristics of an Oncorhynchus mykiss population

2010· article· en· W1991660775 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Donald M. Van Doornik, Barry A. Berejikian, Lance Campbell, Eric C. Volk

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBroodstockBiologyFish migrationPopulationRainbow troutOncorhynchusGenetic diversityFisheryZoologyEcologyExtinction (optical mineralogy)Fish <Actinopterygii>DemographyAquaculture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Conservation hatcheries, which supplement natural populations by removing adults or embryos from the natural environment and rearing and releasing parr, smolts, or adults back into their natal or ancestral streams, are increasingly being used to avoid extinction of localized populations of Pacific salmonids. We collected data before and during a steelhead ( Oncorhynchus mykiss ) supplementation program to investigate the effect that the program has had on the population’s genetic diversity and effective population size and any changes to an important life history trait (residency or anadromy). We found that supplementation did not cause substantial changes in the genetic diversity or effective size of the population, most likely because a large proportion of all of the steelhead redds in the river each year were sampled to create the supplementation broodstock. Our data also showed that the captively reared fish released as adults successfully produced parr. Furthermore, we found that during supplementation, there was an increase in the proportion of O. mykiss with anadromous ancestry vs. resident ancestry.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Citations18
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences→Same topicFish Ecology and Management Studies→French-language works237,207→