MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1995886519 · doi:10.1139/f08-096

Predation by brown trout (<i>Salmo trutta</i>) along a diversifying prey community gradient

2008· article· en· W1995886519 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hallvard Jensen, Kimmo K. Kahilainen, Per‐Arne Amundsen, Karl Øystein Gjelland, Antti Tuomaala, Tommi Malinen, Thomas Bøhn

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBrown troutPredationCoregonus lavaretusBiologySalmoPelagic zoneEcologyCoregonusTroutPiscivoreForagingPredatorBenthic zoneFisheryForage fishSalmonidaeFish <Actinopterygii>

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Predation has a fundamental role in aquatic ecosystems, but the relative importance of factors governing prey selection by predators remains controversial. In this study, we contrast five lakes of a subarctic watershed to explore how prey community characteristics affect prey selection and growth rate of the common top predator, brown trout ( Salmo trutta ). The lakes constitute a distinct gradient of different coregonid prey fish, ranging from monomorphic common whitefish ( Coregonus lavaretus ) to polymorphic whitefish co-occurring with vendace ( Coregonus albula ). The brown trout was a morph–species- and size-specific pelagic predator, selecting the small-sized, pelagic whitefish morph or vendace over the benthic whitefish morphs. In all lakes, the average prey size increased with predator size, but small-sized prey were also included in the diet of large predators. The selection of small-sized, pelagic prey fish appeared to be a favourable foraging strategy for the brown trout, yielding higher growth rates and an earlier ontogenetic shift to piscivory. The findings emphasize that piscivory appear to be shaped by the diversity, size-structure, and abundance of available prey in a given community.

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)0.000
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.178 · 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

Citations65
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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