Using Bioenergetics Modeling to Estimate Consumption of Native Juvenile Salmonids by Nonnative Northern Pike in the Upper Flathead River System, Montana
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Introductions of nonnative northern pike Esox lucius have created recreational fisheries in many waters in the United States and Canada, yet many studies have shown that introduced northern pike may alter the composition and structure of fish communities through predation. We estimated the abundance of nonnative northern pike (2002–2003) and applied food habits data (1999–2003) to estimate their annual consumption of native bull trout Salvelinus confluentus and westslope cutthroat trout Oncorhynchus clarkii lewisi juveniles in the upper Flathead River system, Montana. Population estimates were generally consistent among years and ranged from 1,200 to 1,300 individuals. Westslope cutthroat trout were present in the diet of younger (≤600 mm) and older (>600 mm) northern pike during all seasons and bull trout were found only in larger northern pike during all seasons but summer. Bioenergetics modeling estimated that the northern pike population annually consumed a total of 8.0 metric tons (mt) of fish flesh; the highest biomass was composed of cyprinids (4.95 mt) followed by whitefishes Prosopium spp. (1.02 mt), bull trout (0.80 mt), westslope cutthroat trout (0.68 mt), yellow perch Perca flavescens (0.41 mt),1 and other fishes (centrarchids and cottids; 0.14 mt). Numerically, the northern pike population consumed more than 342,000 fish; cyprinids and catostomids comprised approximately 82% of prey fish (278,925), whereas over 13,000 westslope cutthroat trout and nearly 3,500 bull trout were eaten, comprising about 5% of the prey consumed. Our results suggest that predation by introduced northern pike is contributing to the lower abundance of native salmonids in the system and that a possible benefit might accrue to native salmonids by reducing these predatory interactions.
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 | 0.001 | 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 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".