The behavioural response of juvenile Atlantic salmon (<i>Salmo salar</i>) and brook trout (<i>Salvelinus fontinalis</i>) to experimental hydropeaking on a Newfoundland (Canada) river
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Deregulation of the electric power market globally will lead to increased requirement for electricity on demand resulting in more emphasis on ‘hydropeaking’ generation. A research study was conducted on the regulated West Salmon River, Newfoundland, Canada, to examine habitat selection and movement of juvenile Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) and brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) in response to flow changes related to ‘experimental’ peaking flow power generation. Fish were surgically implanted with microscale radio transmitters, released into an experimental study, and discharge was experimentally manipulated simulating two scenarios: (i) water storage during the day and generation at night, with a 2 hour transition; and (ii) night‐time storage with generation during the day. Experiments were repeated in the summer and fall. Fish were tracked throughout the diurnal cycle of each manipulation and precisely positioned in two‐dimensional space. Atlantic salmon exhibited two distinct patterns to movement: fish that showed high site fidelity and those that moved considerably during trials. Both salmon and trout were more active during fall hydropeaking experiments. Fish generally did not move long distances and moved more in a longitudinal fashion than laterally. Salmon moved greater distances, on average, than trout under all experimental conditions and during both seasons but these differences were not statistically significant. Brook trout moved more in relation to dynamic events (up‐ and down‐ramping) than at steady state flows. Trout also moved more at night during these dynamic changes and under low flow conditions. These results will assist producers of hydroelectricity to reduce the impacts of hydropeaking operations on fish and fish habitat. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".