Preliminary Evaluation of a Large-Scale American Eel Conservation Stocking Experiment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Significant declines in the recruitment of American eels Anguilla rostrata to formerly productive habitats in the upper St. Lawrence River and Lake Ontario resulted in the implementation of an experimental conservation stocking program. Nearly 3.8 million American eels (glass eel and elver stages) were stocked during 2006–2009. Our study objectives were to (1) assess the adequacy of sampling procedures for following temporal changes in stocked eel abundance, (2) examine captured eels for evidence of spinal trauma, (3) qualitatively evaluate whether stocked eels would disperse outside of stocking locations, and (4) provide initial data on biological variables describing young stocked yellow eels. Boat electrofishing was successful at capturing all four stocked year-classes, and the densities of stocked eels in the main stocking locations ranged from 25 to 275 eels/ha. Estimated sampling precision ranged from 0.15 to 0.28, and the estimated sample sizes required to detect a 50% change in stocked eel densities ranged from 27 to 112 electrofishing transects depending on location and season. The stocked American eels dispersed throughout Lake Ontario and demonstrated among the fastest recorded growth rates for this species: 60 to 123 mm/year. The first male American eels ever identified in the St. Lawrence River watershed were among the stocked individuals assessed for gender. We conclude that boat electrofishing for yellow American eels has the potential to measure stocking effectiveness along shallow shorelines with limited aquatic vegetation. We also recognize that the ultimate assessment of the conservation stocking experiment will not be made until future studies on the population demographics, migratory behavior, and spawning physiology of stocked American eels are complete. Received December 10, 2010; accepted May 11, 2011
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".