MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2774483885 · doi:10.1139/cjfas-2016-0344

Effects of hatchery supplementation on abundance and productivity of natural-origin Chinook salmon: two decades of evaluation and implications for conservation programs

2017· article· en· W2774483885 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
David A. Venditti, Ryan Kinzer, Kimberly A Apperson, Bruce Barnett, Matthew J. Belnap, Timothy Copeland, Matthew P. Corsi, Kurt A. Tardy

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOncorhynchusHatcheryChinook windAbundance (ecology)BiologyProductivityJuvenileFisheryPopulationEcologyFish <Actinopterygii>Demography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hatchery supplementation has been developed to conserve salmonid populations and provide fisheries. We evaluated supplemented and reference Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) populations prior to, during, and after supplementation ceased for 22 years in two major drainages in Idaho, USA. Basin-level analyses showed supplementation increased abundance at some life stages, but effects did not persist into the postsupplementation phase and had no apparent influence on productivity. Natural-origin juvenile abundance increased during supplementation but results for adults were ambiguous. After supplementation ceased, abundance and productivity in supplemented and reference populations returned to their presupplementation relationships. Intensive analyses of supplemented populations with weirs showed abundance increased at some life stages with the addition of female spawners. However, the rate of increase varied with female origin (natural > supplementation ≥ nontreatment hatchery), and effects diminished through the life cycle. Based on these findings, we provide guidance for conservation programs. Supplementation alone is not a panacea because it does not correct limiting factors, which must be addressed to achieve population levels capable of sustaining ecological function and harvest.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.988
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.270 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations33
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences→Same topicFish Ecology and Management Studies→French-language works237,207→