MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2092570273 · doi:10.1139/cjfas-2014-0180

Dispersal and productivity of Chinook (<i>Oncorhynchus tshawytscha</i>) and coho (<i>Oncorhynchus kisutch</i>) salmon colonizing newly accessible habitat

2014· article· en· W2092570273 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Joseph H. Anderson, Paul L. Faulds, Karl Burton, Michele E. Koehler, William I. Atlas, Thomas P. Quinn

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOncorhynchusChinook windFisheryHatcheryBiological dispersalProductivityFishingPopulationHabitatBiologyGeographyEcologyFish <Actinopterygii>Demography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Following construction of a fish ladder at Landsburg Diversion Dam on the Cedar River, Washington, USA, in fall 2003, we used DNA-based parentage to identify second generation Chinook (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) and coho (Oncorhynchus kisutch) salmon as recruits that were produced above the dam or “strays” dispersing into the new habitat that were produced elsewhere. For both species, strays colonized immediately but decreased as a proportion of the total run over time. Chinook salmon strays were more numerous in years when the species was more abundant below the dam and included a much larger proportion of hatchery origin salmon than did coho salmon. Productivity, calculated as the ratio of female recruits sampled at the dam to female spawners, exceeded replacement in all four coho salmon cohorts but only two of five Chinook salmon cohorts, leading to more rapid population expansion of coho salmon. However, estimates of fishing mortality and recruitment into the Cedar River below the dam substantially increased Chinook salmon productivity estimates. Our results demonstrate that Pacific salmon are capable of rapidly recolonizing habitat made accessible by restoration and emphasize the importance of demographic exchange with preexisting populations during the transition from recolonization to self-sustainability.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score0.131

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Citations40
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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