Return migration of Atlantic Salmon in the River Tana: Phases of migratory behaviour
Bibliographic record
Abstract
From a total of 174 multi‐sea‐winter Atlantic salmon radio tagged in the Tanafjord (northern Norway, 70°N) during 1992 and 1993, 48 Atlantic salmon were followed from entering the River Tana until spawning. Three phases were identified: (1) migratory, direct or stepwise migration to, or close to the position held at spawning; (2) search, movements both up and down river at or close to the position held at spawning; (3) holding, a period without movements prior to spawning. During the migratory phase, Atlantic salmon migrated directly to near the spawning area, or stopped between one and nine shorter periods during the upstream migration. Number of stops increased with increasing migratory distance in 1993, but no such correlation was found in 1992. The highest migratory speeds were recorded in the lower parts of the river. A distinct change in migratory pattern was found in 67% of the Atlantic salmon near or at the area held at spawning. Most common was a search phase of erratic movements with more than one down river movement. After the movement terminated, 96% of the Atlantic salmon had a period when no or little movement was recorded until spawning (on average 55 days in 1992 and 51 days in 1993). There was no preference for staying at, up or down river from the spawning area during this holding period. Early ascending Atlantic salmon migrated to spawning areas further from the mouth than the later arriving Atlantic salmon in 1993, but not in 1992. The proportion of time spent on the migratory phase increased, while the proportion of time spent on the holding phase decreased with increasing distance to the spawning area.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".