Genetic stock identification of Atlantic salmon and its evaluation in a large population complex
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Addressing biocomplexity in fisheries management is a challenge requiring an ability to differentiate among distinct populations contributing to fisheries. We produced extensive genetic baseline data involving 36 sampling locations and 33 microsatellite markers, which allowed characterization of the genetic structure and diversity in a large Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) population complex of the River Teno system, northernmost Europe. Altogether, we identified 28 hierarchically structured and genetically distinct population segments (global FST = 0.065) corresponding exceptionally well with their geographical locations. An assessment of factors affecting the stock identification accuracy indicated that the identification success is largely defined by the interaction of genetic divergence and the baseline sample sizes. The choice between the two statistical methods tested for performance in genetic stock identification, ONCOR and cBAYES, was not critical, albeit the latter demonstrated slightly higher identification accuracy and lower sensitivity to population composition of the mixture sample. The strong genetic structuring among populations together with a powerful marker system allowed for accurate stock identification of individuals and enabled assessment of stock compositions contributing to mixed-stock fisheries.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".