MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2036128319 · doi:10.1080/02755947.2011.608613

Evaluation of Offshore Stocking of Lake Trout in Lake Ontario

2011· article· en· W2036128319 on OpenAlexaffabout
Brian F. Lantry, Robert O’Gorman, Theodore G Strang, Jana R. Lantry, Michael J. Connerton, Ted Schaner

Bibliographic record

VenueNorth American Journal of Fisheries Management · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Natural Resources and Forestry
FundersNew York State Department of Environmental Conservation
KeywordsStockingFisheryTroutHatcherySubmarine pipelineEnvironmental sciencePopulationShoreSalvelinusPredationGeographyOceanographyFish <Actinopterygii>BiologyEcologyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Restoration stocking of hatchery-reared lake trout Salvelinus namaycush has occurred in Lake Ontario since 1973. In U.S. waters, fish stocked through 1990 survived well and built a large adult population. Survival of yearlings stocked from shore declined during 1990–1995, and adult numbers fell during 1998–2005. Offshore stocking of lake trout was initiated in the late 1990s in response to its successful mitigation of predation losses to double-crested cormorants Phalacrocorax auritus and the results of earlier studies that suggested it would enhance survival in some cases. The current study was designed to test the relative effectiveness of three stocking methods at a time when poststocking survival for lake trout was quite low and losses due to fish predators was a suspected factor. The stocking methods tested during 2000–2002 included May offshore, May onshore, and June onshore. Visual observations during nearshore stockings and hydroacoustic observations of offshore stockings indicated that release methods were not a direct cause of fish mortality. Experimental stockings were replicated for 3 years at one site in the southwest and for 2 years at one site in the southeast. Offshore releases used a landing craft to transport hatchery trucks from 3 to 6 km offshore out to 55–60-m-deep water. For the southwest site, offshore stocking significantly enhanced poststocking survival. Among the three methods, survival ratios were 1.74 : 1.00 : 1.02 (May offshore : May onshore : June onshore). Although not statistically significant owing to the small samples, the trends were similar for the southeast site, with survival ratios of 1.67 : 1.00 : 0.72. Consistent trends across years and sites indicated that offshore stocking of yearling lake trout during 2000–2002 provided nearly a twofold enhancement in survival; however, this increase does not appear to be great enough to achieve the 12-fold enhancement necessary to return population abundance to restoration targets. Received November 29, 2010; accepted May 18, 2011

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.647
Threshold uncertainty score0.702

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.197 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations12
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNorth American Journal of Fisheries ManagementSame topicFish Ecology and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207