The effects of hatchery domestication on competitive dominance of juvenile spring Chinook salmon (<i>Oncorhynchus tshawytscha</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We tested the null hypotheses that competitive dominance among juvenile Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) in contest and scramble experiments would not be affected by domestication selection after one generation of state-of-the-art hatchery culture. Dyadic challenges of size-matched juvenile fish were conducted after a 6-day acclimation in 113.4 L aquaria. Differences in dominance and frequency of different types of agonistic interactions used were not significantly different in contest (n = 505) or scramble (n = 363) competition experiments (P > 0.05). However, wild origin fish were more aggressive than hatchery origin fish in both types of experiments (P ≤ 0.05). Furthermore, wild origin fish gained more weight than hatchery origin fish during contest experiments, and hatchery origin fish lost less weight than wild origin fish in scramble experiments (P ≤ 0.05). Dominant fish, regardless of origin, grew more than subordinate fish in both contest and scramble experiments (P ≤ 0.05). Our results indicate that aggression, and growth mediated by competition, can be affected by domestication after only one generation of state-of-the-art hatchery culture; however, impacts to competitive dominance appear to be small.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".