MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2092312754 · doi:10.1139/f03-162

Drifters versus residents: assessing size and age differences in Atlantic salmon (<i>Salmo salar</i>) fry

2004· article· en· W2092312754 on OpenAlexfundvenueaboutno aff
Valérie Bujold, Richard A. Cunjak, Jason P. Dietrich, David A Courtemanche

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSalmoFisheryPopulationCompetition (biology)Fish <Actinopterygii>HabitatSalmonidaeGeographyBiologyEcologyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Some young-of-the-year Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) have a tendency to drift soon after emergence from the gravel, whereas others, called resident fry, set up and defend territories. Little is known about the mechanisms regulating this strong tendency to drift soon after emergence, a phenomenon that can greatly influence survival within a population. This study was carried out in the Western Brook system, Gros Morne National Park, Newfoundland, Canada. The objective was to assess differences, through biometric characteristics, between drifting and resident Atlantic salmon fry by examining both groups of fish caught simultaneously in the same riverine habitat. Resident salmon fry can be up to 4.8% longer and 20.4% heavier compared with drifting fry of similar age (measured in days since emergence). Therefore, it seems that competition, more than prior residence effect, could be part of the driving forces behind this active movement and that differences between subpopulations of Atlantic salmon fry can have major repercussions on life history patterns.

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)0.001
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 score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score0.138

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.225
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 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

Citations46
Published2004
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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