Introduction of the non‐indigenous amphipod <i>Gammarus pulex</i> alters population dynamics and diet of juvenile trout <i>Salmo trutta</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary 1. The amphipod Gammarus pulex , introduced to Irish rivers with the aim of enhancing trout feeding, is displacing the native Gammarus duebeni celticus . These two species are generally associated with different environmental conditions and macroinvertebrate communities, confounding assessment of effects of the invader as compared with the native on fish populations. Here, we uncouple effects of the two Gammarus species from environmental gradients. 2. A weir dissects a lowland stretch of the River Lissan, slowing the upstream invasion by G. pulex and resulting in contiguous G. pulex , mixed species and G. d. celticus reaches. Total invertebrate abundance and biomass in the benthos were significantly higher in the G. pulex reach, driven by high invader abundance, with low abundance of other taxa. Gammarus pulex was particularly prominent in night‐time drift. 3. Correspondingly, densities and biomass of 0+ trout were significantly higher in the G. pulex reach, while instantaneous loss rates were lower. Fish growth rates were similar among the three reaches. 4. In the G. pulex reach, this invader dominated the diet of 0+ trout, leading to ingestion of significantly higher invertebrate biomass than fish in the other reaches. Fish generally preyed on Gammarus in proportion to its abundance, but exhibited some positive selection for G. pulex in the invaded reach. 5. The negative effects of the invader on native invertebrates are contrasted with positive effects on juvenile trout. This indicates changes in energy flux after invasion, with differential resource use or assimilation by G. pulex probable underlying mechanisms. As the frequency of amphipod invasions increases globally, investigations of their role as strong interactors at multiple levels of ecological organisation is required if the consequences of deliberate and unintentional introductions are to be predicted, and ultimately, prevented.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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 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".