Swimming performance of sauger (<i>Sander canadensis</i>) in relation to fish passage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A lack of information on the swimming abilities of sauger (Sander canadensis), a highly migratory species particularly sensitive to habitat fragmentation, may inhibit the design of effective passage structures for this species. Passage success, maximum ascent distances, and maximum sprint velocities of sauger were estimated in an open-channel flume over a range of water velocities (51, 78, and 92 cm·s−1) and temperatures (10.0, 14.3, and 18.3 °C) to assess swimming performance. Passage success was high (91%) over all test velocities, as was the maximum instantaneous burst velocity (219 cm·s−1). Water temperature and body size had little effect on swimming performance. Sauger transitioned from steady, sustained swimming to unsteady, burst–glide, or steady burst swimming at 97 cm·s−1. Sauger were capable of sustained sprints of 124 cm·s−1 over 15 s duration in a swim chamber. Results suggest passage structures with water velocities less than 97 cm·s−1 should provide high probability of successful passage of adult sauger, whereas structures with water velocities exceeding 219 cm·s−1 may be impassable.
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 | 0.001 | 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".