Survival and Growth Responses of Juvenile Salmonines Stocked in Eastern Lake Ontario Tributaries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract To evaluate the species‐specific and stream‐specific suitability of juvenile salmonine habitat in the southern Lake Ontario watershed, we studied the effects of multiple environmental gradients on the first‐summer apparent survival and growth of various combinations of Atlantic salmonSalmo salar, rainbow troutOncorhynchus mykiss, and coho salmonO. kisutchstocked in tributaries. Costocking of eitherOncorhynchusspecies had no detectable effect on the apparent survival or change in cohort biomass of Atlantic salmon, but their growth rates were reduced slightly when they were stocked with rainbow trout. Generally, Atlantic salmon outperformed their putative competitors. Summer temperatures were near the physiological optimum for Atlantic salmon but may have limited the success of rainbow trout and especially coho salmon. Total salmonine biomass was maximized at sites in which only Atlantic salmon were planted. Apparent survival and biomass elaboration of Atlantic salmon varied inversely with stream size, temperature, and the abundance of wild salmonines and piscivores, whereas growth rate responded positively to moderate increases in summer temperature, agricultural development, and nutrient enrichment. These regional and species‐specific differences in stocked salmonine success may, in part, be explained by variations in temperature, geomorphology, and anthropogenic influences. We recommend that the feasibility of restoring Atlantic salmon continues to be evaluated, especially in those tributaries considered to be of marginal quality for other salmonines.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".