Egg retention in relation to arrival timing and reproductive longevity in female sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Some female Pacific salmon ( Oncorhynchus spp.) arrive at spawning grounds but fail to complete spawning prior to death. One hypothesis regarding egg retention is that some individuals do not have sufficient time on spawning grounds for successful completion of spawning. We investigated this hypothesis by quantifying the relationships among arrival timing, reproductive longevity, and egg retention in female sockeye salmon ( Oncorhynchus nerka ) from Weaver Creek Spawning Channel (British Columbia, Canada) in 2006. 250 females were tagged over three sampling periods and followed until death. Earlier-arriving females lived longer than later-arriving females (p < 0.001), but patterns of egg retention were not different across sampling dates (p > 0.40). Complete spawners tended to establish a redd sooner after arrival than incomplete spawners (p = 0.001); there was no relationship between spawning completion and reproductive maturity or fork length (p > 0.30). Consistent with the time limitation hypothesis, females retained a lower proportion of eggs with increasing reproductive longevity. Several long-lived females (>7 days) failed to spawn completely before death, indicating that time limitation was not a factor for spawning success in all females. Further research examining the role of individual-specific behavioural physiology on egg retention in sockeye salmon is needed.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".