Reducing Carryover Effects on the Migration and Spawning Success of Sockeye Salmon through a Management Experiment of Dam Flows
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Effective dam management requires an understanding of the ecological impact of a facility and its operations on individual fish and fish populations. Traversing high flows downstream of dams is an energetically challenging activity that could influence survival and spawning success following passage. Carryover effects, however, are an underappreciated consequence of dam passage that have been overlooked by researchers and natural resource managers. We conducted a large‐scale management experiment to determine if the operation of dam attraction flows could be changed to reduce high sockeye salmon Oncorhynchus nerka mortality following passage and increase spawning success. We tested two flow conditions: (i) a baseline condition—currently used by managers—that released high attraction flows directly adjacent to the entrance to a vertical‐slot fishway and (ii) an alternative condition that released attraction flows 10 m away from the fishway entrance to reduce the flows fish swim through while approaching the passage structure. We tagged 637 sockeye salmon with telemetry tags to monitor dam passage, post‐passage survival to spawning grounds and spawning success under the two flow conditions. Validated fish counters at the exit of the fishway and on spawning grounds were used to generate population level estimates of survival to spawning grounds. Individuals exposed to baseline flow conditions spent two times longer recovering from dam passage and exhibited 10% higher mortality following passage than those exposed to alternative flows. Release of alternative flows for 10 days assisted approximately 550 fish (or 3% of total spawners) in reaching spawning grounds. Once on spawning grounds, female spawning success was strongly influenced by individual spawning characteristics (longevity and date of arrival on spawning grounds) and not dam flow condition. Our findings highlight a cost‐effective solution that decreases mortality following passage simply by altering the location of dam flow releases and not reductions in discharge. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".