MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2264404053 · doi:10.1080/02755947.2015.1103821

Predation on Chinook Salmon Parr by Hatchery Salmonids and Fallfish in the Salmon River, New York

2016· article· en· W2264404053 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
James H. Johnson, Christopher C. Nack, Marc A. Chalupnicki, Ross Abbett, James E. McKenna

Bibliographic record

VenueNorth American Journal of Fisheries Management · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Geological Survey
KeywordsChinook windOncorhynchusHatcheryFisheryPredationTributaryBiologyEnvironmental scienceFish <Actinopterygii>GeographyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Naturally reproduced Chinook Salmon Oncorhynchus tshawytscha contribute substantially to the fishery in Lake Ontario. The Salmon River, a Lake Ontario tributary in New York, produces the largest numbers of naturally spawned Chinook Salmon, with parr abundance in the river often exceeding 10 million. In the spring of each year, large numbers of hatchery salmonid yearlings—potential predators of Chinook Salmon parr—are released into the Salmon River by the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. We sought to examine predation on Chinook Salmon parr in the Salmon River during May and June prior to out-migration. Over the 4 years examined (2009–2012), annual consumption of Chinook Salmon parr by hatchery-released yearling steelhead O. mykiss and Coho Salmon O. kisutch ranged from 1.5 to 3.3 million and from 0.4 to 2.1 million, respectively. In 2009, Fallfish Semotilus corporalis were estimated to consume 2.9 million Chinook Salmon parr. Predation was higher in May, when the average TL of Chinook Salmon parr was 44.5 mm, than in June. Fallfish were also important predators of naturally reproduced steelhead subyearlings, consuming an estimated 800,000 steelhead in 2009. Hatchery-released yearling salmonids consumed 13.8–15.3% of the Chinook Salmon parr that were estimated to be present in the Salmon River during 2010–2012. Earlier releases of hatchery salmonid yearlings could reduce the riverine consumption of Chinook Salmon parr by facilitating the out-migration of yearlings prior to Chinook Salmon emergence. Received February 23, 2015; September 29, 2015

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)0.000
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 score0.234
Threshold uncertainty score0.464

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.184 · 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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNorth American Journal of Fisheries ManagementSame topicFish Ecology and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207