Diversity in Habitat Use and Trophic Ecology of Brook Trout in Lake Superior and Tributary Streams Revealed Through Stable Isotopes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Two distinct types of brook troutSalvelinus fontinalishave been hypothesized to occur in Lake Superior: large fish that inhabit Lake Superior for much of the year but spawn in tributary streams, and small fish that are resident in tributary streams. The lake type has declined markedly in range and abundance, and a greater understanding of the behavior and ecology of these populations is needed to support conservation efforts. Comparisons of stable isotope (δ13C and δ15N) signatures between fish caught in the lake and those captured in streams supported the hypothesis of relatively distinct types differing in habitat use and trophic ecology. Comparisons of δ13C values for brook trout, other fishes, and aquatic invertebrates collected from stream, stream‐mouth, and lake habitats suggested that large‐type brook trout are lake specialists, whereas small‐type brook trout are stream specialists, stream–lake generalists, or some mixture of the two. Delineating the diversity in habitat use and trophic ecology of Lake Superior brook trout represents a crucial initial step toward understanding the mechanisms responsible for the observed phenotypic diversity and for developing science‐based plans to conserve or restore this diversity.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".