Spawning site fidelity of wild and hatchery lake trout (<i>Salvelinus namaycush</i>) in northern Lake Huron
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fidelity to high-quality spawning sites helps ensure that adults repeatedly spawn at sites that maximize reproductive success. Fidelity is also an important behavioural characteristic to consider when hatchery-reared individuals are stocked for species restoration, because artificial rearing environments may interfere with cues that guide appropriate spawning site selection. Acoustic telemetry was used in conjunction with Cormack–Jolly–Seber capture–recapture models to compare degree of spawning site fidelity of wild and hatchery-reared lake trout (Salvelinus namaycush) in northern Lake Huron. Annual survival was estimated to be between 77% and 81% and did not differ among wild and hatchery males and females. Site fidelity estimates were high in both wild and hatchery-reared lake trout (ranging from 0.78 to 0.94, depending on group and time filter), but were slightly lower in hatchery-reared fish than in wild fish. The ecological implication of the small difference in site fidelity between wild and hatchery-reared lake trout is unclear, but similarities in estimates suggest that many hatchery-reared fish use similar spawning sites to wild fish and that most return to those sites annually for spawning.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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".