Assessment of a Constructed Fish Migration Barrier Using Radio Telemetry and Floy Tagging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We assessed the effectiveness of a constructed fish migration barrier in the Salmo River, British Columbia, Canada, 10 years after it was constructed. The barrier was initially installed to prevent an expected increase in upstream migration of suckers Catostomus spp. and northern pikeminnow Ptychocheilus oregonensis into the Salmo River following the creation of Seven Mile Reservoir on the Pend d'Oreille River. To determine the effectiveness of the barrier, we applied radio and Floy tags to these species in Seven Mile Reservoir to assess whether upstream migration over the barrier was occurring. After sampling below the barrier, 5 largescale suckers C. macrocheilus and 5 northern pikeminnow were radio-tagged, whereas 124 suckers and 11 northern pikeminnow were Floy-tagged. Radio tracking surveys confirmed that most radio-tagged suckers and northern pikeminnow made migrations only within the reservoir, but one sucker was tracked above the barrier. This movement occurred after the peak of annual discharge. During snorkel surveys conducted above the barrier, we observed five Floy-tagged suckers. The results are discussed in relation to the use of tagging methods to monitor sucker and northern pikeminnow migrations and assess the effectiveness of constructed fish migration barriers.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".