Acoustic and Strobe-light Behavioural Barriers: Examining Behavioural and Movement Responses of Common Carp (Cyprinus carpio) at Laboratory and Mesocosm Scales
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Acoustic and strobe-light behavioral barriers have been recognized as tools to limit the spread of Asian carps in the Great Lakes. Urgent research is needed to understand how these stimuli impact behaviour, and to evaluate barrier efficacy within realistic canal environments. In a laboratory study, Common Carp responses to stimuli were recorded with video trials (n=44). There were no differences in behavioural responses to acoustic, strobe-light, or combined stimuli. The stimulus period increased durations of carp movement, and the post-stimulus period had increases in movement duration and barrier passes. In a mesocosm study, Common Carp (n=6) and buffalo (n=3) were exposed to the same stimuli, and movement was analyzed using acoustic telemetry. Acoustic stimuli did not produce significant movement responses. Strobe lights (n=12) produced smaller utilization distributions, a decrease in relocations, and an increase in travel velocity near the stimuli (
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".