Size-related habitat use in juvenile Atlantic salmon: the importance of intercohort competition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In stream-living salmonids, an underlying mechanism for the critical period after emergence has generally been assumed to be size-dependent swimming capacity constraining fry (age-0) to low-velocity habitats with reduced food availability and intense competition. A further plausible mechanism is that intercohort habitat exclusion confines fry to marginal habitats. This possibility was tested using a seminatural stream with 16 test arenas, each comprising one high-velocity, deep habitat and one low-velocity, shallow habitat. We observed groups of newly emerged Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) fry, either alone or in sympatry with one or two age-1 salmon. Salmon fry used high-velocity areas (42.2 ± 0.4 cm·s−1) most extensively in the absence of intercohort competition, where they obtained more food than in low-velocity areas (3.3 ± 0.3 cm·s−1), even though foraging efficiency was lower (though not significantly so). In sympatry with older cohorts, fry increased their use of the low-velocity habitat, with a reduced foraging activity, suggesting that strong older cohorts in natural populations may have the potential to influence the strength of the recruiting cohort by negative density dependence due to interference competition for habitat.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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".