Evaluation and Comparison of a Habitat Suitability Model for Postdrift Larval Lake Sturgeon in the St. Clair and Detroit Rivers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We evaluated composition and spatial distribution of riverine nursery habitat for larval Lake Sturgeon Acipenser fulvescens in the Middle Channel of the St. Clair River, Michigan, and Fighting Island Channel of the Detroit River, Ontario, using a habitat suitability model (HSM) and fish collections. Although model outputs indicated similar portions of high-quality habitat in the Middle Channel (16.9%) and Fighting Island Channel (15.7%), larval abundance and dispersal patterns varied between these systems. Analysis with Akaike's information criterion indicated that a regression model using sand–silt substrate performed best at predicting the observed water-volume-standardized CPUE (number of larvae·h−1·m−3) in the Middle Channel. Of 93 larvae that were collected in the Middle Channel, most were found to cluster at three distinct areas of high- and moderate-quality habitat, which was composed predominately of sand–silt substrate. Lengths of larvae varied by as much as 9 mm, and the degree of yolk sac absorption also varied, indicating that larvae in the Middle Channel remained within the channel after a short drift downstream. Of the 25 larvae that were collected in Fighting Island Channel, distribution was sporadic, and occurrence did not significantly correlate with measured habitat variables. Larvae were relatively homogeneous in size and yolk sac stage, indicating that newly emerged larvae did not utilize available habitat in Fighting Island Channel but instead drifted into the main channel of the Detroit River. Dispersal patterns indicate variability in young Lake Sturgeon ecology, which is dependent on local habitat conditions—most notably, substrate composition. Furthermore, modeled larval–habitat associations found in this study were compared to a similar study on larval Lake Sturgeon from the North Channel of the St. Clair River. Model outputs from all three systems accurately accounted for observed larval dispersal patterns among both rivers. This supports the transferability of an HSM parameterized for Lake Sturgeon from individual river reaches within two large river systems.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".