Assessing the effect of visual isolation on the population density of Atlantic salmon (<i>Salmo salar</i>) using GIS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Few studies investigate the behavioural response of organisms to stream enhancement schemes. One behavioural process that is rarely examined in enhancement studies is the visual isolation created by adding boulders on the river bed. The objective of this research is to use a Geographic Information Systems (GIS) viewshed analysis to determine if the increase in density of Atlantic salmon observed in boulder‐added zones is related to visual isolation or, alternatively, the presence of a velocity refuge. Eight study sites were established on Catamaran Brook and Little Southwest Miramichi River (New Brunswick, Canada). Each reach was divided into three quadrats of 3 m × 2 m. In one of the quadrats, 36 boulders ( D 50 = 0.20 m) were added to increase visual isolation. Boulders were removed from another adjacent quadrat whereas a third quadrat was left in a natural state. A detailed Digital Elevation Model (DEM) was created for all the sites with a total station. Atlantic salmon were observed by snorkelling on several occasions during two summers. Their position was recorded with the total station and the snout and average velocity was measured. A GIS viewshed analysis was performed to determine the visible area for each fish and to verify whether the surrounding fish were visible or not. Results suggest that the primary mechanism responsible for the observed increase in Atlantic salmon population density in the experimental quadrats is a reduction in the field of view of individuals, through an increase in habitat heterogeneity, which is consistent with the visual isolation hypothesis. There was also no change in the snout velocity of salmon among the three treatments, suggesting that the increase in density is not consistent with the velocity‐refuge hypothesis. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".