Effects of artificial woody structures on Atlantic salmon habitat and populations in a Nova Scotia stream
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A 1‐km reach of Brierly Brook, Nova Scotia, was studied from 1995 to 2004 to determine if the addition of artificial structures mimicking large woody debris could enhance Atlantic salmon populations. In 1995, digger logs (which mimic fallen trees) and deflectors (which narrow the channel) were constructed in a 250‐m section of the brook devoid of woody debris (Old Restored Site). In 2003, 5 more digger logs and defectors were built in a previously unrestored section of the stream (New Restored Site). A third control site was left unchanged. Physical changes caused by the structures were monitored at the New Restored Site. Densities of juvenile and spawning Atlantic salmon were also monitored. At all sites, woody debris structures in the brook were important and effective in creating complex salmonid habitat. The structures narrowed the channel, scoured pools and undercut banks. They created habitat that parr used for summer and winter refuge and adult spawners used for cover and resting during upstream migration and spawning. The structures caused gravels to accumulate that spawning adults used to build redds and fry used for shelter. The reaches with structures had higher spawning densities than reaches without them; spawning increased in the New Restored Site relative to the control site. The absence of woody debris may be a bottleneck for salmonid populations in streams of the Atlantic Northeast. For streams with a small or immature riparian zone and little woody debris in the channel, woody structures may be an effective tool for restoring salmonid populations. Copyright © 2008 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 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".