Evaluating the influence of stocking history and barriers to movement on the spatial extent of hybridization between westslope cutthroat trout and rainbow trout
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study we examine how the stocking of rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss), as well as the presence of fish movement barriers, influences the probability of introgression with westslope cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarkii lewisi). We measured the level of introgression in cutthroat trout sampled from 32 locations that occurred either above or below fish movement barriers along with the frequency and number of rainbow trout stocked in the watershed over a 43-year period. The occurrence and level of hybridization in cutthroat trout were not related to whether the site was above a movement barrier or not. In contrast, the level of introgression was related to the distance to the nearest stocking location, the number of stocking events within the nearest watershed, and the total number of rainbow trout stocked in that watershed. Our data indicate that westslope cutthroat trout located further from stocking have a lower risk of introgression with rainbow trout, but those isolated above movement barriers should not be considered free from introgression until a thorough genetic assessment of the location has been made.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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".