Potential of habitat complexity for mitigating interference competition between native and non-native salmonid species
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to confirm the mitigation effect of structurally complex habitat on interspecific interference competition between native and non-native salmonid species. We evaluated the effects of habitat complexity (number and size of aggregates of large woody debris and length of undercut banks) and other habitat components that were related to the local abundance of salmonids (dimension and mean depth of pool, mean particle size, and mean current velocity) on the local abundance of native white-spotted char ( Salvelinus leucomaenis (Pallas, 1814)) in allopatry and sympatry with non-native brown trout ( Salmo trutta L., 1758). The field survey was conducted in a Japanese montane stream. The number of char in pool habitats in the allopatric area correlated positively with habitat size, i.e., pool dimension. The number of char in the sympatric area with trout was positively correlated with habitat complexity, while it was negatively correlated with number of trout. In this study, we found that structurally complex habitats might be effective in mitigating interspecific competition between native white-spotted char and non-native brown trout in a montane stream.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".