Movement patterns in inland cutthroat trout (<i>Oncorhynchus clarki utah</i>): management and conservation implications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Knowledge of movement patterns is critical to the management and conservation of inland salmonids. We studied the movements of Bonneville cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarki utah) in a drainage in western Wyoming, USA. Our objectives were to (i) characterize the postspawning movement patterns of adult Bonneville cutthroat trout, (ii) contrast postspawning and summer movement patterns, and (iii) identify factors that disrupt the movements of Bonneville cutthroat trout. Our data showed that postspawning movements of Bonneville cutthroat trout formed a continuum, with fish moving from 0.5 to 82.0 km. Postspawning distance was positively related to fish length. Despite the wide range of movement observed during the spring, fish did not move more than 0.5 km during the summer. A road culvert and an irrigation diversion dam did not seem to pose barriers to the upstream movement of Bonneville cutthroat trout to headwater spawning areas in the spring. However, 23% of radio-tagged fish in 2000 moved into the irrigation diversion ditch as they moved downstream after spawning and subsequently died there. Maintaining drainage connectivity is an important conservation concern for trout populations such as this one, where fish move between complementary spawning and summer habitats.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".