Estimating spatial–temporal differences in Chinook salmon outmigration survival with habitat- and predation-related covariates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Low survival rates of Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) smolts in California’s Central Valley have been attributed to multiple biological and physical factors, but it is not clear which factors have the largest impact. We used 5 years of acoustic telemetry data for 1709 late-fall Chinook salmon smolts to evaluate the effect of habitat- and predation-related covariates on outmigration survival through the Sacramento River. Using a Cormack–Jolly–Seber mark–recapture model, we estimated survival rates both as a function of covariates (covariate model) and as a function of river location and release year (spatial–temporal model). Our covariate model was overwhelmingly supported as the preferred model based on model selection criteria, suggesting the covariates adequately replicated spatial and temporal patterns in smolt survival. The covariates in the selected model included individual fish covariates, habitat-specific covariates, and temporally variable physical conditions. The most important covariate affecting salmon survival was flow. We describe the importance of these parameters in the context of juvenile salmon predation risk and suggest that additional research on predator distribution and density could improve model estimates.
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 | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".