Sediment and Salmon: The Role of Spawning Sockeye Salmon in Annual Bed Load Transport Characteristics in Small, Interior Streams of British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The redd construction process of sockeye salmon Oncorhynchus nerka may be an important and unique component of bed load transport in some northern, interior British Columbia streams. Using pit trap samplers in four streams over 6 years, we examined bed load accumulation and size composition after three distinct periods: spring flood (high flow), salmon spawning (low flow), and winter (low flow). Bed load movement increased with stream velocity and more accumulated during the spring floods than during the winter. However, bed load accumulations were greater during the spawning period than during the winter at similar thalweg velocities. There was a significant influence of spawning fish density on the amount of bed load accumulated. The variability in bed load size composition was most attributable to the tendency for spawners to move proportionally more large material than was moved during the flood and winter periods, with a grain‐size distribution that was comparable to the source material in all but one of the creeks. Mobilization of intermediate‐size material distinguished the spring flood period from the low‐flow winter period but accounted for considerably less of the overall variation. Variability among years was minor. Relative to hydraulic factors, salmon spawning activities have a density‐dependent and unique influence on the mobilization of bed material in interior watersheds. We speculate that there is a positive feedback mechanism by which healthy salmonid stocks contribute to the maintenance of the small stream ecosystems on which they depend.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".