An experimental evaluation of competitive and thermal effects on brown trout (<i>Salmo trutta</i>) and Bonneville cutthroat trout (<i>Oncorhynchus clarkii</i> <i>utah</i>) performance along an altitudinal gradient
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Temperature-mediated competition (i.e., dominance shifts between species depending on temperature) may explain the segregation of salmonid species along altitudinal stream gradients. We evaluated this hypothesis for exotic brown trout (Salmo trutta) and native Bonneville cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarkii utah) by rearing them in experimental sympatry and allopatry using enclosures constructed at six sites spaced along a 45-km segment of a mountain stream. For both species, we compared condition and growth between allopatric and sympatric treatment groups. We found that brown trout negatively affected cutthroat trout performance, whereas cutthroat trout failed to impart an effect in the reverse direction, regardless of temperature. Thus, we documented asymmetric competition between these species but found little evidence indicating that its outcome was influenced by temperature. Brown trout cutthroat trout segregation is therefore unlikely to be due to temperature-mediated competition. Instead, brown trout may have displaced cutthroat trout from downstream areas through competition or other mechanisms, while abiotic factors preclude their (brown trout) invasion of upper elevations. Given the magnitude of effect observed in our study, we recommend that brown trout receive greater consideration in cutthroat trout conservation.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".