Relative Activity of Brook Trout and Walleyes in Response to Flow in a Regulated River
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Coded electromyogram telemetry transmitters were used to examine the effects of varying flows on the relative activity of brook trout Salvelinus fontinalis and walleye Sander vitreus in a regulated river. The relative activity levels of two brook trout and two walleyes were continuously monitored for a minimum of 24 h, and measurements were compared with river flow values logged at nearby gauging stations. Generally, fish relative activity levels mimicked patterns of flow change, peaks in activity level corresponding to peaks in flow. Mean relative activity was generally greatest at extreme high (≥25-m3/s) and low (<15-m3/s) flows. High flows may have elicited hyperactivity (increased activity) as fish sought suitable refugia, increased activity to hold position in the water column, or increased feeding activity on increased levels of drifting invertebrates. Hyperactivity at low flows may have been caused by relocation due to habitat loss or ease of movement at lower flow regimes. Physiological telemetry provides researchers with a method of quantifying the immediate effects of flow changes on fish. Increasing our knowledge of the effects of river regulation on fish is essential to the development of more effective management strategies that balance ecology and economics.
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".