MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2320735070 · doi:10.1139/f2011-062

Down, up, down and “smolting” twice? Seasonal movement patterns by juvenile steelhead (<i>Oncorhynchus mykiss</i>) in a coastal watershed with a bar closing estuary

2011· article· en· W2320735070 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sean A. Hayes, Morgan H. Bond, Chad Hanson, Andrew W. Jones, Arnold J. Ammann, Jeffrey A. Harding, Jeffrey M. Perez, R. Bruce MacFarlane

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Marine Fisheries Service
KeywordsEstuaryRainbow troutFish migrationFisheryChinook windEnvironmental scienceTroutJuvenileSpring (device)WatershedJuvenile fishHabitatOceanographyEcologyOncorhynchusBiologyFish <Actinopterygii>Geology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigated emigration behavior, habitat use, and Na+,K+-ATPase activity levels of juvenile steelhead trout (sea-run rainbow trout; Oncorhynchus mykiss ) in Scott Creek, a small coastal watershed with a seasonally closed estuary in central California, USA. Migratory fish moved downstream in the spring with elevated Na+,K+-ATPase activity levels. Larger fish (>150 mm) moved downstream during February and March, leaving the stream, whereas fish moving between April and June were typically smaller and tended to recruit to the estuary. The Na+,K+-ATPase activity levels of estuarine fish varied during the summer as a function of salinity and temperature, but overall levels declined from peak spring values. Many summer recruits were observed retreating upstream into the watershed when estuarine water quality declined in the fall. Rather than entering the ocean when winter storms reconnected the estuary with the ocean in early winter, many migrated downstream several months later during subsequent springs. The largest smolts observed (>190 mm fork length (LF)) were primarily those that had reared in the estuary the previous summer. Smolts were observed making a single migration from the upper watershed, but they were smaller (~120–190 mm LF) with potentially reduced marine survival. In summary, we observed fish moving between freshwater and estuarine habitats seasonally and adjusting their osmoregulatory physiology as needed.

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 score0.965
Threshold uncertainty score0.070

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.177 · 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

Citations44
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences→Same topicFish Ecology and Management Studies→French-language works237,207→