POPULATION ECOLOGY OF AN INVASION: EFFECTS OF BROOK TROUT ON NATIVE CUTTHROAT TROUT
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Invasion by nonnative brook trout ( Salvelinus fontinalis ) often results in replacement of cutthroat trout ( Oncorhynchus clarki ) in the inland western United States, but the underlying mechanisms are not well understood. We conducted a four‐year removal experiment to test for population‐level mechanisms (i.e., changes in recruitment, survival, emigration, and immigration) promoting invasion success of brook trout and causing decline of native Colorado River cutthroat trout ( O. c. pleuriticus ). We chose 700–1200 m segments of four small mountain streams where brook trout had recently invaded cutthroat trout populations, two each at mid elevation (2500–2700 m) and high elevation (3150–3250 m), and annually removed brook trout from two streams (treatments), but not the other two (controls). We used depletion electrofishing, two‐way fish weirs, and mark–recapture methods to estimate abundance, movement, and survival of trout. At mid elevation, age‐0 and age‐1 cutthroat trout survived at 13 times and two times higher rates on average, respectively, where brook trout were removed. At high‐elevation sites, recruitment of cutthroat trout failed despite brook trout removals, apparently because of cold water temperatures. In contrast, age‐2 and older cutthroat trout survived at similar rates, whether brook trout were removed or not and regardless of elevation. Summer movement by cutthroat trout was unaffected by removal of brook trout. We conclude that brook trout depress cutthroat trout populations at mid elevation through age‐specific biotic interactions that reduce juvenile cutthroat trout survival, whereas populations restricted to high‐elevation sites by invasion continue to decline because an abiotic factor (low temperature) causes recruitment failure. In comparison, brook trout survived at the same or higher rates than same‐aged cutthroat trout. High immigration by brook trout recolonized depleted segments, and may help sustain invasions in sink habitats where environmental conditions limit recruitment. In streams similar to those we studied, eradication of brook trout is likely necessary to eliminate the threat to native cutthroat trout, but selective removal regimes that capture a high percentage of the brook trout population for least three consecutive years, repeated periodically, may permit cutthroat trout populations to persist with brook trout. To identify underlying mechanisms responsible for successful invasion by mobile, age‐structured vertebrates such as stream fishes, experiments conducted at realistic spatial and temporal scales and including multiple age classes will be required.
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) | 0.000 | 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".