Evaluating a light‐louver system for behavioural guidance of age‐0 white sturgeon
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Water diversions for hydropower and other applications are some of the most disruptive alterations affecting fish populations in lotic systems. Although many different strategies have been developed to reduce lethal encounters with such infrastructure, few studies have evaluated different forms of behavioural guidance concurrently. Here, we combine an LED‐based light guidance device (LGD) equipped with adjustable wavelength and strobing output with a reverse‐configured louver rack to assess the effectiveness of this two‐part behavioural guidance system on downstream movement through a bypass by age‐0 white sturgeon ( Acipenser transmontanus ). Several combinations of LGD and louver settings were tested under both simulated day and night (low light) conditions in a laboratory setting. In the absence of the LGD, louver slat spacings of 10 or 20 cm were most effective at achieving downstream bypasses with greater success rates (~ two‐fold greater) under night conditions than under day conditions. Incorporating the LGD operating at the most attractive setting (green light strobing at 20 Hz) with the louver spacings of 10 or 20 cm achieved the highest rates of bypass usage (100% and 97%, respectively) under both day and night conditions while the control treatment (no LGD or louver) resulted in the lowest bypass rate (46%) among fish that moved downstream. Collectively, these results demonstrate that complementary cues can enhance the behavioural guidance of fishes and highlight the importance of continuing to explore the use of multiple strategies to mitigate entrainment for high priority fish species.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".