MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2912186086 · doi:10.1111/eff.12470

Habitat overlap of juvenile and adult lake trout of Great Bear Lake: Evidence for lack of a predation gradient?

2019· article· en· W2912186086 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Louise Chavarie, Katie E. Howland, Les N. Harris, Colin P. Gallagher, William J. Harford, William M. Tonn, Andrew M. Muir, Charles C. Krueger

Bibliographic record

VenueEcology Of Freshwater Fish · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaFisheries and Oceans CanadaUniversity of British Columbia
FundersFisheries and Oceans CanadaGreat Lakes Fishery Commission
KeywordsTroutPredationSalvelinusJuvenileHabitatForagingEcologyBiologyJuvenile fishCannibalismRange (aeronautics)FisheryFish <Actinopterygii>

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A range of organisms, from plankton to fish, commonly shift their habitat distributions horizontally or vertically due to predation risk. Juvenile lake trout, Salvelinus namaycush , are generally viewed as occupying deep areas of lakes to decrease predation pressure from adults. In contrast, we found that juvenile lake trout from Great Bear Lake, NT, Canada, occupied a variety of habitats and from shallow to deep depths (0–150 m), overlapping with adult lake trout. No evidence occurred for a length depth‐based segregation (e.g., ontogenetic shift). Genetic variation was also similar among juveniles in the different depth zones. However, isotopic niches and C:N ratios among juveniles showed some variability in niche widths and positions for individuals caught from the 51–150 m zone compared to juvenile individuals caught from 0–20 m and 21–50 m zones. The uniformly distributed adult lake trout in Great Bear Lake may evenly distribute predation pressure (including cannibalism) across shallow‐ and deep‐water habitats more than in other lakes. As a result, juveniles may respond to differences in foraging opportunities rather than predation risks. Juvenile lake trout did not appear to conform to the general pattern of juveniles seeking a deep‐water refuge to reduce predation risks. In contrast, juvenile lake trout of Great Bear Lake displayed broad resource use across all depths and habitats.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.108
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations10
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcology Of Freshwater FishSame topicFish Ecology and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207