Physiology and performance of wild and domestic strains of diploid and triploid rainbow trout (<i>Oncorhynchus mykiss</i>) in response to environmental challenges
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To determine the factors that may contribute to the poor survival of triploid (3n) rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in lake stocking programs, we compared the physiology and responses to environmental challenges of four wild strains and one domestic strain of diploid (2n) and 3n juvenile rainbow trout. Over four successive years, wild trout were caught from nature, spawned, and progeny were reared in a hatchery along with hatchery-bred domestic trout. Offspring of each strain were raised for up to 12 months as both 2n and 3n, and growth rate, critical swimming speed, routine oxygen consumption rate, critical oxygen tensions, thermal tolerance, and hypoxia tolerance were assessed in a laboratory setting. Cohorts of the 2008, 2009, and 2010 wild strains were also stocked into two experimental lakes and recaptured as adults using traps and fyke nets in 2011 for laboratory analysis. In the juvenile trout, the only measure of performance to show a consistent difference between 2n and 3n individuals across all strains was hypoxia tolerance, where 3n trout had a shorter time to loss of equilibrium (LOE) at 16 Torr than their 2n counterparts, but this effect was not seen in adult, lake-reared trout. Strain had a significant effect on specific growth rate, critical swimming speed (U crit ), and time to LOE in hypoxia, although the effects of strain on these variables was not consistent from year to year. Overall, this study suggests that poorer hypoxia tolerance in 3n trout compared with 2n trout may be a contributing factor to the higher lake stocking mortalities in 3n trout.
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) | 0.000 | 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".