MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Survival and behaviour of post‐smolt Atlantic salmon in coastal habitat with extreme tides

2005· article· en· W2089132878 on OpenAlexaffabout
G. Lacroix, Derek Knox, Michael J. W. Stokesbury

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Fish Biology · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsFisheries and Oceans Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBayHabitatFisheryOceanographyRiver mouthFlood mythWest coastEast coastEnvironmental scienceFish migrationGeographyEcologyBiologyGeologySediment

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The early marine migration of 55 Atlantic salmon post‐smolts tagged with acoustic transmitters was automatically monitored using 13 to 25 km long arrays of receivers deployed inside the Bay of Fundy, a coastal system on the east coast of Canada. The survival of post‐smolts from groups with short‐ and long‐term transmitters in coastal habitat up to 10 km from the river was 92 to 100%, indicating a successful transition to salt water and departure. Migration for 68 to 77% of post‐smolts followed a direct route and it was rapid (transit time usually <12 h). Post‐smolts initially migrated in a south to south‐west direction ( i.e . orientation towards the mouth of the bay) and they were aggregated near the coast. Post‐smolts with long‐term transmitters were monitored 20 km from the river where they continued to be aggregated, moving near the coast through a ‘common corridor’, and their survival to that point was at least 84%. Post‐smolts from both groups travelled heading out of the coastal system during ebb tides. Flood tides interrupted migration, and they caused changes in travel direction and delays in departure for post‐smolts not leaving by a direct route. Monitoring of coastal habitat inside the Bay of Fundy intercepted 62% of migrating post‐smolts with long‐term transmitters returning after an initial absence of 2 to 22 days. Returning post‐smolts displayed a resident behaviour, using the habitat monitored inside the Bay of Fundy during July and August.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.978

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations78
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Fish BiologySame topicFish Ecology and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207