Changes in the Canadian River Fish Assemblage Associated with Reservoir Construction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The fish assemblage of the Canadian River in Texas historically was dominated by Hybognathus placitus and Notropis girardi. These species represented > 90% of fishes collected from the Canadian River in 1954–1955. Construction of two reservoirs on the Canadian River in the 1960s (Ute Reservoir, New Mexico, 1962; Lake Meredith, Texas, 1965) altered hydrologic conditions in the river and affected the fish assemblage. Downstream from Ute Reservoir, mean annual discharge decreased by about 38% after impoundment, but H. placitus, N. girardi, and other mainstem species still dominate the assemblage. Downstream from Lake Meredith, mean annual discharge decreased by 76% and the historic mainstem fish assemblage has been almost completely replaced by species that formerly were restricted to tributary streams. The magnitude of post-impoundment changes in the fish assemblage of the Canadian River appears to be related to the degree that discharge has declined, especially during the spawning season.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".