MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2063850546 · doi:10.1139/f04-144

Response by trout populations in alpine lakes to an experimental halt to stocking

2004· article· en· W2063850546 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Trip Armstrong, Roland A. Knapp

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCalifornia Department of Fish and Game
KeywordsStockingTroutFisheryEcologyPopulationBiologyNational parkCanyonGeographyHabitatFish <Actinopterygii>Demography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Trout are often stocked into alpine lakes based on the generally untested assumption that resident populations would go extinct without stocking. The objectives of our study were to estimate the proportion of currently or formerly stocked alpine lakes in the Sierra Nevada, California, containing naturally reproducing trout populations (Oncorhynchus mykiss, Oncorhynchus mykiss aguabonita, Oncorhynchus clarki henshawi), identify characteristics of lakes associated with successful reproduction, and quantify the effects of stocking termination on trout density and individual growth rates in reproducing populations. We surveyed trout populations in 95 lakes in the John Muir Wilderness before and after a 4- to 8-year stocking halt and in 84 lakes in Sequoia–Kings Canyon National Park after a ≥20-year stocking hiatus. Based on recruitment during the no-stocking period, 70% and 68% of study lakes in the John Muir Wilderness and Sequoia-Kings Canyon National Park, respectively, contained reproducing populations. Results indicated that lakes with >2.1 m 2 of spawning habitat and at elevations <3520 m nearly always showed evidence of reproduction. For reproducing populations, stocking termination did not result in significant changes in population density, but may have increased individual growth rates. We conclude that most trout stocking in Sierra Nevada alpine lakes could be permanently halted with only minimal impact on the recreational fishery.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.237 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations29
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences→Same topicFish Ecology and Management Studies→French-language works237,207→