Variation of agonistic behavior among juvenile Chinook salmon (<i>Oncorhynchus tshawytscha</i>) of hatchery, hybrid, and wild origin
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Agonistic behavior and ability to dominate were compared among juveniles from a hatchery stock of Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) that has experienced five generations of hatchery culture, juveniles derived from the wild founding stock but produced from parents cultured in the same hatchery environment as the hatchery stock, and second-generation hybrids between the two lines. Equal numbers of parr (18) from equal numbers of families (5) from each fish line (3) were tested, and all lines were raised in a similar hatchery environment. During 20 min of observation in replicate artificial stream tanks, hatchery-derived fish made significantly greater numbers of charges, displays, and nips than wild-derived fish. Hybrids also made significantly greater numbers of charges, displays, and nips than wild-derived fish but significantly fewer displays than hatchery-derived fish. No difference was detected in the ability of fish lines to win dyadic dominance contests. These results suggest that the differences detected are genetic in origin and are consistent with divergence of the hatchery stock from the founding wild stock.
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 | 0.001 | 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".