Dynamics of individual growth in a recovering population of lake trout (<i>Salvelinus namaycush</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 1976, the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources established a refuge for a nearly depleted population of lake trout (Salvelinus namaycush) at Gull Island Shoal, Lake Superior. The refuge was intended to reduce fishing mortality by protecting adult lake trout. We examined the growth dynamics of these lake trout during the period of recovery by comparing estimates of individual growth before and after the refuge was established. Our estimates are based on an annual mark-recapture survey conducted at the spawning area since 1969. We developed a model that allowed mean growth rates to differ among individuals of different sizes and that accommodated variation in growth rates of individuals of the same size. Likelihood ratio tests were used to determine if the mean growth increments of lake trout changed after the refuge was established. Our results suggest that growth of mature lake trout (particularly wild fish) decreased significantly in the postrefuge period. This decreased growth may have been associated with a reduction in food availability. We also observed reductions in growth as wild fish grew older and larger, which suggests that the growth of these fish may be adequately approximated by a von Bertalanffy growth model if it becomes possible to obtain accurate ages.
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 | 0.000 | 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".