Annual Movements of Acoustic‐Tagged White Sturgeon in the Lower Reaches of the Fraser River and its Tributaries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Details of the spatial ecology of White Sturgeon Acipenser transmontanus in the lower Fraser River, British Columbia, are needed for habitat conservation, assessments of impacts from spatially delimited threats, and refinement of abundance estimation methods. The abundance of threatened lower Fraser River White Sturgeon is assessed annually using a Bayesian, closed‐population, mark–recapture model. If individuals make prolonged departures from the lower Fraser River, either into marine waters or a tributary, the validity of the model's assumed closed population is questionable. There is also concern that fish might move far enough to be exposed to harvest in Puget Sound, Washington. From 2008 to 2012, White Sturgeon of various sizes were acoustically tagged in the Pitt River (n = 58) and in the lower reaches of the Fraser River (near Douglas Island, n = 52) to determine the timing, rate, and spatial extent of movements. Movements were monitored using acoustic receivers at 17 locations in the lowermost 92 km of the main‐stem Fraser River, three in the first 21 km of the Pitt River (a tributary to the lower Fraser River), and nine in the coastal waters of British Columbia and Washington State. Travel speeds showed a strong skew toward slower movements (74% were <1 km/h) and did not differ significantly between upstream and downstream directions. On average, 33.2% of the sample was mobile (displacing ~13.4 km/month) and 66.8% was sedentary (displacing ~1.87 km/month). In general, White Sturgeon were significantly more sedentary during winter months and more mobile during spring and fall. Annual or seasonal migratory movements and patterns were observed for 73% of fish tracked. Repeated use of specific locations within the lower Pitt River during midwinter suggested White Sturgeon have a high fidelity for specific overwintering sites. Several of the tagged fish showed annual movements to the lowest reaches of the Fraser River for 1–3 months between May and September, although there was no direct evidence that they left the Fraser River and entered the Strait of Georgia. By contrast, there was strong evidence for extended and repeated movement into the lower Pitt River. Given that the lower Pitt River is outside the mark–recapture assessment area, our results suggest either that the area's boundaries need expansion, or alternative models should be considered for abundance estimations of lower Fraser River White Sturgeon. Received September 7, 2016; accepted February 3, 2017 Published online April 27, 2017
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".