MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2888234358 · doi:10.1139/cjfas-2018-0110

Invasive brook trout disrupt the diel activity and aggregation patterns of native brown trout

2018· article· en· W2888234358 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nicolas Larranaga, Magnus Lovén Wallerius, Haoyu Guo, Julien Cucherousset, Jörgen I. Johnsson

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAgence Nationale de la Recherche
KeywordsBrown troutSympatryFontinalisSalvelinusSalmoTroutDiel vertical migrationBiologyEcologySympatric speciationCompetition (biology)Allopatric speciationPredationFisheryPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In European streams, native brown trout (Salmo trutta) feed primarily on aquatic prey but consume a higher proportion of terrestrial prey in sympatry with non-native brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis). This is a rare example of diet convergence that may be associated with changes in diel activity or aggregation pattern by brown trout in sympatry. We recorded the activity and positions of brown trout from two origins and in two competition modes (allopatry versus sympatry, four combinations) placed in replicated stream enclosures for 29 days to test these hypotheses. Brown trout originating from or placed in sympatry were more diurnal and aggregated than those originating from or placed in allopatry. Changes in the diel activity of brown trout placed in a novel competition mode occurred progressively throughout the study. Thus, brown trout show strong behavioral flexibility in response to the non-native competitor and can revert to allopatric behavior when brook trout is removed from the system. These behavioral adjustments may have unsuspected effects on food webs and ecosystem functioning, which deserve further attention.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Citations19
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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