Comparison of growth physiology, morphology, and smolt indicators in juvenile Lake Superior brook trout (<i>Salvelinus fontinalis</i>) strains in reference to life history variation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lake Superior supports fluvial, adfluvial, and lacustrine populations of brook trout ( Salvelinus fontinalis ). Adfluvial and lacustrine populations (termed coasters) are known for their large size and are coveted by anglers; however, little is known about their migratory habits or physiology. This study examined physiology and morphology of age 1+ lacustrine, adfluvial, and fluvial strains of brook trout in a laboratory setting. All strains in the study grew; however, there were no differences in growth rate, condition, relative mass, morphology, white muscle metabolic enzymes, or gill Na+,K+-ATPase that clearly associated with putative life history strategy. Both thyroxine and triiodothyronine varied over the study period, and the fluvial (resident) strain consistently showed lower thyroid hormone levels than the three coaster strains. We conclude that the populations compared differed at the strain level, but do not show physiological or morphological variability that clearly associates with life history strategy; the exception was that populations demonstrating the coaster phenotype had increased concentrations of plasma thyroid hormones, which may be linked to growth potential or other coaster-related characteristics such as migration.
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) | 0.000 | 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".