Environmental factors affecting growth of eastern sand darter (<i>Ammocrypta pellucida</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Environmental factors affecting growth of the threatened eastern sand darter ( Ammocrypta pellucida (Putnam, 1863)) were examined using specimens sampled from the northern edge of its range to determine the species’ critical habitat. Length-at-age increments were determined from scale samples as surrogates for growth rates based on back-calculated lengths using the Fraser–Lee method. During the first year of life, 82% of total length is attained, suggesting considerable energetic partitioning towards reproduction following age-0. Positive relationships between age-0 length increments and sand substrates and between age-0 length increments and mean annual channel discharge indicated greatest first-year growth within sand-dominated, high-discharge habitats. Environmental factors that occurred at coarse spatial and temporal levels (i.e., mean annual channel discharge) explained more of the growth variability among eastern sand darters than those occurring at fine levels (i.e., site-level substrate composition). This study indicates that environmental factors can be used to explain variability in cohort-structured population and site-level growth of eastern sand darters.
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".