MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2531642789 · doi:10.1139/cjfas-2016-0089

Migratory behavior of adult sea lamprey and cumulative passage performance through four fishways

2016· article· en· W2531642789 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Theodore Castro‐Santos, Xiaotao Shi, Àlex Haro

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPetromyzonLampreyDiel vertical migrationFish migrationFisheryRange (aeronautics)Fish <Actinopterygii>EcologyEnvironmental scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article describes a study of PIT-tagged sea lamprey (Petromyzon marinus) ascending four fishways comprising three designs at two dams on the Connecticut River, USA. Migration between dams was rapid (median migration rate = 23 km·day−1). Movement through the fishways was much slower, however (median = 0.02–0.33 km·day−1). Overall delay at dams was substantial (median = 13.6–14.6 days); many fish failed to pass (percent passage ranged from 29% to 55%, depending on fishway), and repeated passage attempts compounded delay for both passers and failers. Cox regression revealed that fishway entry rates were influenced by flow, temperature, and diel cycle, with most lampreys entering at night and at elevated flows, but with no apparent effect of sex or length. Overall delay was influenced by slow movement through the fishways, but repeated failures were the primary factor determining delay. These data suggest that although some lamprey were able to pass fishways, they did so with difficulty, and delays incurred as they attempted to pass may act to limit their distribution within their native range.

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 score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.191 · 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

Citations63
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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