Body size and the adoption of a migratory tactic in brook charr
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The presence of a conditional strategy based on size attained before migration and a sex‐ratio at migration biased towards females were explored in a population of brook charr Salvelinus fontinalis in the Sainte‐Marguerite River, Quebec Province, Canada, where anadromous and resident forms live sympatrically. Seaward migration in the system occurred at 1 and 2 years old. Comparisons between backcalculated size‐at‐age of migrant and resident fish revealed that smaller fish at age 1 year delay migration to the following year and that bigger fish either migrated at age 1 year or remained resident for the rest of their life‐cycle. Slow growth was associated with migration later in life (age 2 years) at a bigger size, which is consistent with the hypothesis of a threshold size for migration. No difference in size at age 1 year between migrant and resident fish suggests that other factors, such as growth efficiency and the presence of heritability of the tactics, are involved. Overall the sex ratio was equal for migrant and resident fish, while an age‐specific bias was found: more males migrated at age 1 year and more females at age 2 years. These differences suggest that different tactics are adopted by different sexes.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".