An evaluation of the Clearwater River supplementation program in western Washington
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents preliminary results of a study to evaluate the potential utility of supplementation of natural origin coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch) on the Clearwater River, a tributary of the Queets River in western Washington. The study, initiated in 1984, involves the collection of natural origin brood stock, rearing in a combination of hatchery and natural environments, and volitional releases, combined with marking and sampling of natural origin fish. Primary findings relative to five essential research questions of this study concluded that (i) smolts from supplementation returned at a lower rate than natural smolts; (ii) the reproductive efficiency (spawner to spawner) of fish taken for supplementation was higher than that for fish allowed to spawn naturally; (iii) supplemental fish successfully reproduced and the combined supplementalnatural spawning population had a high productivity; (iv) supplementation did not appear to have affected the overall reproductive performance of the population for the duration of the project; and (v) supplementation increased the overall spawner return on the Clearwater River and is required to maximize adult production, unless conditions in both freshwater and ocean environments are optimal.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".