Retention and Nonlethal External Detection of Calcein Marks in Rainbow Trout and Chinook Salmon
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract An osmotic induction method was used to apply calcein marks to Chinook salmon Oncorhynchus tshawytscha and the Kamloops strain of rainbow trout O. mykiss (both migratory strains used for stocking into tributaries of Lake Superior). Preliminary exposure to a saline solution followed by immersion in a 0.5% calcein solution encouraged rapid infusion of calcein into fish tissues. Four-month-old Chinook salmon were exposed to a 1.5% or 5.0% salt solution to evaluate tolerance of different salinities and effects on mark intensity and retention. Rainbow trout were marked at three ages (2 weeks, 3.5 months, and 16 months posthatch) to evaluate the effects of age at treatment on mark intensity and long-term retention (a 5.0% preliminary salt bath was used). External detection of marks in scales, head, and fin rays was accomplished with a hand-held detector. The marking technique we used was well tolerated by both Chinook salmon and rainbow trout, and marks persisted into adulthood for rainbow trout treated at 3.5 months posthatch or later. The 5% salt concentration resulted in the persistence of more intense marks than did the 1.5% salt concentration. We demonstrated the potential applicability of calcein marks for instream population studies of migratory or anadromous species treated as fry or for studies involving release of post-fry-stage migratory or anadromous fish intended for recapture as adults.
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) | 0.000 | 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".