A high‐resolution hydrodynamic investigation of brown trout (<i>Salmo trutta</i>) and rainbow trout (<i>Oncorhynchus mykiss</i>) redds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract High‐resolution velocity measurements were taken over a series of redds on a gravel‐bed stream using a Pulse Coherent Acoustic Doppler Profiler (PCADP) to quantify the hydrodynamics of brown trout ( Salmo trutta ) and rainbow trout ( Oncorhynchus mykiss ) redds. On redds studied, over 4500 velocity measurements per redd were acquired per day to quantify the flow velocity, flow depth and related fluid mechanics metrics of Reynolds numbers, Froude numbers and turbulent kinetic energy per unit area. Results showed that velocity and Froude numbers varied widely at the redd scale, but consistently showed higher velocities and Froude numbers over the tailspill regions relative to the surrounding study limits. Results of Reynolds numbers calculations showed no apparent correlations to spawning location preference and redd structure. Turbulent kinetic energy per unit area consistently demonstrated a strong correlation with redd locations. The metric maintained low values (i.e. unidirectional flow with little turbulence) where all redds and attempted redds were observed. The study also demonstrates that a number of hydraulic metrics and several spatial scales will likely be necessary to understand any inherent relationship between river hydraulics and redd placement. Copyright © 2010 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 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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".