Effects of acidic pH on wild, farmed, and F1 hybrid Atlantic salmon (<i>Salmo salar</i>) parr
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Farmed escapees have the potential to introduce novel genes to wild salmon and alter locally adapted populations. We tested whether the acidic conditions found in rivers on Newfoundland’s south coast might differentially impact offspring of farmed Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) in comparison to wild populations. We performed crosses with wild and farmed parents to obtain wild (W♂ × W♀), farmed (F♂ × F♀), and F1 hybrid (W♂ × F♀, F♂ × W♀) parr and conducted a common garden experiment at neutral or acidic pH. No differences were observed between pure wild crosses and F1 hybrids, suggesting that acidic waters do not differentially affect survival, growth, condition factor, and Na+/K+-ATPase activity of F1 hybrids. Trends in mortality show that pure farmed parr had lower survival than pure wild and F1 hybrids in low pH. Considering that production of F1 hybrids rather than pure farmed offspring is the most likely outcome in the wild, pure farmed parr survival may have little bearing on the prediction of genetic risks of farmed–wild interactions. There is no evidence to indicate that the survival of the F1 generation in acidic waters acts as a potential barrier against introgression.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".