Effects of River Discharge, Temperature, and Future Climates on Energetics and Mortality of Adult Migrating Fraser River Sockeye Salmon
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We evaluated the effects of past and future trends in temperature and discharge in the Fraser River on the migratory performance of the early Stuart population of sockeye salmon Oncorhynchus nerka. Fish of lower condition exhibited disproportionately higher mortality during the spawning run, elucidating a critical link between energetic condition and a fish's ability to reach the spawning grounds. We simulated spawning migrations by accounting for energetic demands for an average individual in the population from the time of entry into the Fraser River estuary to arrival on the spawning grounds (about 1,200 km upstream) and estimated energy expenditures for the average migrant during 1950–2001. The model output indicates relatively high interannual variability in migration energy use and a marked increase in energy demands in recent years related to unusually high discharges (e.g., 1997) and warmer than average water temperature (e.g., 1998). We examined how global climate change might effect discharge, water temperature, and the energy used by sockeye salmon during their spawning migration. Expected future reductions in peak flows during freshets markedly reduced transit time to the spawning ground, representing a substantial energy savings that compensated for the effect of the increased metabolic rate resulting from exposure to warmer river temperatures. We suggest that such watershed‐scale compensatory mechanisms may be critical to the long‐term sustainability of Pacific salmon, given expected changes in climate. However, such compensation will probably only be applicable to some stocks and may be limited under extremely high temperatures where nonenergetic factors such as disease and stress may play a more dominant role in defining mortality. Our results further indicate that a long‐term decline in the mean mass of adult sockeye salmon completing their marine residency could erode their migratory fitness during the river migration and hence jeopardize the sustainability of sockeye salmon and the fishery that targets them.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".