Early life traits of farm and wild <scp>A</scp>tlantic salmon <i><scp>S</scp>almo salar</i> and first generation hybrids in the south coast of <scp>N</scp>ewfoundland
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined fertilization rates, survival and early life‐trait differences of pure farm, wild and first generation (F1) hybrid origin embryos after crossing farm and wild Atlantic salmon Salmo salar. Results show that despite a trend towards higher in vitro fertilization success for wild females, differences in fertilization success in river water are not significantly different among crosses. In a hatchery environment, wild females' progeny (pure wild and hybrids with wild maternal parent) hatched 7–11 days earlier than pure farm crosses and hybrids with farm maternal parents. In addition, pure wild progeny had higher total lengths (LT) at hatch than pure farm crosses and hybrids. Directions in trait differences need to be tested in a river environment, but results clearly show the maternal influence on early stages beyond egg‐size differences. Differences in LT were no longer significant at 70 days post hatch (shortly after the onset of exogenous feeding) showing the need to investigate later developmental stages to better assess somatic growth disparities due to genetic differences. Higher mortality rates of the most likely hybrids (farm female × wild male hybrids) at egg and fry stages and their delayed hatch suggest that these F1 hybrids might be less likely to survive the early larval stages than wild stocks.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".