The effect of a single prerelease exposure to conspecific alarm cue on poststocking survival in three strains of rainbow trout (<i>Oncorhynchus</i> <i>mykiss</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Significant resources go toward rearing and stocking fish globally, yet poststocking survival is often low, largely due to high predation rates on hatchery-reared fish. Antipredator behavior has been enhanced in many species through exposure to chemical cues that simulate predation events, but the implementation of such protocols may be logistically challenging. It has been suggested that a single exposure of hatchery fish to chemical cues while en route to stocking locations may be sufficient to enhance antipredator behavior and improve survival. We tested whether a one-time exposure to conspecific alarm cues while en route to a stocking site increased poststocking survival of three strains of rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss (Walbaum, 1792)). We found no difference in mortality rates between strains or between treatment fish (exposed to alarm cues) and control fish (not exposed to alarm cues), suggesting that this quick and easy protocol was insufficient and that more complex techniques should be explored to increase poststocking survival.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".