MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2088115016 · doi:10.1139/f99-253

Experimental demonstration of differences in sheltering behaviour between Icelandic populations of Atlantic salmon (<i>Salmo salar</i>) and Arctic char (<i>Salvelinus alpinus</i>)

2000· article· en· W2088115016 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sveinn K. Valdimarsson, Neil B. Metcalfe, Skúli Skúlason

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArctic charSalvelinusSalmoJuvenileSalmonidaePopulationArcticFish migrationFisheryEcologyBiologyFish <Actinopterygii>TroutZoologyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Most salmonids, as well as many other freshwater fish species in the Northern Hemisphere, have been reported to show some form of daytime sheltering behaviour over the winter. Previous work has shown that temperatures around 6-8°C trigger the onset of this sheltering behaviour. However, fish from colder environments would be expected to respond differently to temperature than fish from warmer environments. The incidence of sheltering at different temperatures between two Icelandic populations of both juvenile Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) and juvenile Arctic char (Salvelinus alpinus) was examined by quantifying the use of refuges in identical controlled laboratory conditions. The results showed clear differences in the sheltering response between the different populations. Salmon from a warm, productive stream and riverine char emerged more by day from their shelter at low temperatures (5-8°C) than did either salmon from a cold, unproductive stream or char from a landlocked lake population. These population differences indicate local adaptations that must be kept in mind when managing fish populations; moreover, the differences do not appear to be predictable on the basis of ambient thermal regimes.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations28
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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