MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2568719761 · doi:10.1139/cjfas-2015-0488

Dispersal and density-dependent growth of Atlantic salmon (<i>Salmo salar</i>) juveniles: clumped versus dispersed stocking

2017· article· en· W2568719761 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Eric Blake Brunsdon, Dylan J. Fraser, William R. Ardren, James W. A. Grant

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsConcordia UniversityHuntsman Marine Science Centre
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaU.S. Fish and Wildlife ServiceConcordia University
KeywordsSalmoStockingBiological dispersalBiologyDensity dependenceJuvenileHabitatEcologyIntraspecific competitionGrowth ratePopulation densityFisheryFish <Actinopterygii>Population

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dispersal from nesting sites and habitat selection are essential for the fitness of young individuals and shape the distribution, growth, and persistence of populations. These processes are important to consider when releasing young, hatchery-origin fishes into the wild to restore extirpated or depleted populations. By manipulating the density of released young-of-the-year (YOY) Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar), we evaluated the effects of clumped- (releasing all the fish at one location) and dispersed-stocking (releasing the fish evenly over a complete reach) treatments on juvenile habitat use, dispersal, growth, and survival. Across 14 river reaches, clump-stocked YOY density decreased and growth rate increased with distance downstream, whereas dispersed-stocked YOY densities and growth were relatively constant. Overall, density, spatial variance in density, growth, and survival did not differ between these two stocking treatments, likely due to the greater-than-expected mobility of fish in clumped-stocking reaches; YOY dispersed up to 1600 m, with 41% moving over 200 m downstream. As predicted from previous work, growth rate of individual fish was density-dependent, following a negative power curve. Our results provide insights into how the growth and survival of released individuals are altered via stocking treatments, ultimately shaping their distribution and growth rate.

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 score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations21
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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