Integrating techniques: a review of the effects of anthropogenic noise on freshwater fish
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In recent years, the effects of anthropogenic noise on freshwater fish has been of increasing interest for fishery managers due to rising levels of this background noise. While it is clear that anthropogenic noise can have important impacts on mammals and marine fish, much less is known about these effects in fresh water. The influence of anthropogenic noise on freshwater fish can be quantified using the same methods as with marine species — through measuring changes in behavioural and physiological outputs. Here, we briefly review the literature regarding behavioural and physiological impacts of noise pollution on freshwater fish and further note the lack of incorporation of both behavioural and physiological measures within current studies. We call for an increased research emphasis on possible effects of anthropogenic noise on freshwater fish and further suggest that the integration of behavioural and physiological techniques is critical for a full understanding of these effects. While freshwater fish face many stressors, it is unclear how important anthropogenic noise really is, and this issue can only be properly resolved through careful study.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".