Early Ocean Dispersal Patterns of Columbia River Chinook and Coho Salmon
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Several evolutionarily significant units (ESUs) of Columbia River asin Chinook SalmonOncorhynchus tshawytschaand Coho SalmonO. kisutchare listed as threatened or endangered under the U.S. Endangered Species Act. Yet little is known about the spatial and temporal distributions of these ESUs immediately following ocean entry, when year‐class success may be determined. We documented differences in dispersal patterns during the early ocean period among groups defined by ESU, adult run timing, and smolt age. Between 1995 and 2006, 1,896 coded‐wire‐tagged juvenile fish from the Columbia River basin were recovered during 6,142 research trawl events along the West Coast of North America. Three distinct ocean dispersal patterns were observed: (1) age‐1 (yearling) mid and upper Columbia River spring‐run and Snake River spring–summer‐run Chinook Salmon migrated rapidly northward and by late summer were not found south of Vancouver Island; (2) age‐0 (subyearling) lower Columbia River fall, upper Columbia River summer, upper Columbia River fall, and Snake River fall Chinook Salmon dispersed slowly, remaining mainly south of Vancouver Island through autumn; and (3) age‐1 lower Columbia River spring, upper Columbia River summer, and upper Willamette River spring Chinook Salmon and Coho Salmon were widespread along the coast from summer through fall, indicating a diversity of dispersal rates. Generally, the ocean dispersal of age‐1 fish was faster and more extensive than that of age‐0 fish, with some age‐1 fish migrating as fast as 10–40 km/d (0.5–3.0 body lengths/s). Within groups, interannual variation in dispersal was moderate. Identification of the distinct temporal and spatial ocean distribution patterns of juvenile salmon from Columbia River basin ESUs is important in order to evaluate the potential influence of changing ocean conditions on the survival and long term sustainability of these fish populations.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".