The effect of competition among three salmonids on dominance and growth during the juvenile life stage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Although non‐native species can sometimes threaten the value of ecosystem services, their presence can contribute to the benefits derived from the environment. In the G reat L akes, non‐native brown trout ( S almo trutta ) and rainbow trout ( O ncorhynchus mykiss ) support substantial recreational fisheries. With current efforts underway to restore once‐native A tlantic salmon ( S almo salar ) to L ake O ntario, there is some concern that A tlantic salmon will impede non‐native contributions to the recreational fishery because A tlantic salmon exhibit niche overlap with brown trout and rainbow trout, particularly during the juvenile life stage. We therefore examined competition and growth of juvenile A tlantic salmon, brown trout and rainbow trout in semi‐natural streams. We found that brown trout were the most dominant and had the greatest growth rate regardless of what other species were present. Rainbow trout were more dominant than A tlantic salmon and consumed the most food of the three species. However, in the presence of brown trout, rainbow trout fed less frequently and exhibited negative growth as compared to when the rainbow trout were present with only A tlantic salmon. These data suggest that, outside of density‐dependent effects, Atlantic salmon will not impact stream production of brown trout and rainbow trout.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".