The growth and diet composition of sockeye salmon smolts in Rivers Inlet, British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the early life history of sockeye salmon smolts, prey availability (quality and quantity) and growth are strongly linked. During this critical period, when ~ 90% of their mortality occurs, they must attain a critical size at which they have sufficient energy stores to survive their long migration with little predation impact, leading to better survival and higher returns. To determine patterns of growth of out-migrating sockeye salmon and to link inter-annual variations in growth to diet and seasonality of the zooplankton community, seine netting and zooplankton tows were conducted in May-June 2008, 2009, and 2010 in Rivers Inlet, British Columbia, a fjord with estuarine circulation. Growth rate, condition factor and mass-length relationships were calculated from length and mass data obtained from fresh fish. Stomachs were analyzed for total prey composition in terms of biomass and abundance. Growth rates were faster in 2009 and 2010 than in 2008; however, the condition factor was highest in 2010, and similar in 2009 and 2008. Mass-length relationships indicated that sockeye smolts were significantly heavier per unit length in 2010 (p < 0.05). Bottom-up controls on spring productivity acting through environmental forcing such as temperature and advection may be responsible for the slower growth in the 2008 out-migrating population of sockeye salmon smolts. In 2008, quality and quantity of prey available may have not provided enough energy to maintain metabolism and to support rapid growth, possibly due to a mismatch in timing between spring productivity and the migration of the smolts.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".