MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2153249384 · doi:10.1139/f00-143

Can Atlantic salmon smolt twice? Endocrine and biochemical changes during smolting

2000· article· en· W2153249384 on OpenAlexaffvenue
J. Mark Shrimpton, Björn Thrándur Björnsson, Stephen D. McCormick

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAquaculture Nutrition and Growth
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British Columbia
FundersU.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
KeywordsSalmoSmoltificationHatchingBiologyHatcheryFisheryAnimal scienceFish <Actinopterygii>HormoneSalmonidaeZoologyEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Smolting is characterized by morphological and physiological changes, some of which are reversible if fish remain in freshwater. Whether fish that smolt in the first year will repeat physiological changes associated with smolting a second time is not known. To assess whether Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) can smolt more than once, we sampled hatchery-reared Atlantic salmon at monthly intervals for 2 years beginning the fall after hatching. Fish showed differences in rate of growth and were easily differentiated by size into upper mode (UM) and lower mode (LM) by the first fall. In the first spring, gill Na+,K+-ATPase activity of UM and LM fish increased six- and three-fold, respectively. Plasma growth hormone levels in spring were significantly elevated in UM fish but not in LM. Plasma cortisol levels changed little and gill corticosteroid receptor concentration did not differ between the groups. During the summer, gill Na+,K+-ATPase activity declined in both groups and remained low until the next spring. The second spring, growth hormone levels did not increase significantly and cortisol levels increased. The increase in gill Na+,K+-ATPase activity and cortisol and high saltwater tolerance indicate that UM Atlantic salmon can smolt in two consecutive years.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.016
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.181 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations54
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic SciencesSame topicAquaculture Nutrition and GrowthFrench-language works237,207