Seasonal and ontogenetic patterns in the migration of anadromous brook charr (<i>Salvelinus fontinalis</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Migration patterns of brook charr (Salvelinus fontinalis) from the Sainte-Marguerite River, Québec, Canada, were investigated to explore the hypothesis that migratory behaviour changes according to size during the critical period of first downstream migration, when survival is likely to be related to size, and during subsequent seasonal movements. We hypothesized that as fish grow, they should adopt more conservative behaviours to protect the reproductive assets that they have accumulated. First downstream migration occurred over a month in spring. Larger juvenile charr migrated early, whereas smaller charr seemed to delay offshore migration. As predicted, migratory patterns of charr changed through ontogeny. Sea age 0 juveniles stayed in estuarine areas until October and overwintered outside their natal river. Sea age 1 juveniles returned to their natal river earlier in the fall and some of them overwintered there. Adults (some sea age 1 migrants and older migrants) undertook their upstream migration to spawning areas from July to September, larger ones migrating earlier than smaller ones. Postspawners migrated downstream after reproduction or overwintered in the river. Environmental differences related to geographical location may be responsible for the variation of migration patterns and other life-history traits observed among brook charr populations, emphasizing the co-evolution of anadromy and life history.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".