Kootenai River Fisheries Investigation; Stock Status of Burbot, 2003-2004 Annual Report.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The main objective of this investigation was to monitor movement and spawning activity of burbot Lota lota in the Kootenai River, Idaho and British Columbia, Canada during the winter of 2003-2004. Due to low precipitation and snow pack, as well as low levels of Lake Koocanusa, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers refrained from releasing discharges >113 m{sup 3}/s from Libby Dam for most of the winter. This situation provided suitable conditions for burbot migration and spawning in the mainstem river. Hoop nets captured 19 burbot, which ranged from 447 mm to 760 mm TL (mean = 630 mm) and weighed from 420 g to 4,032 g (mean = 1,937 g) with a mean W{sub r} of 99. One burbot (burbot 214) was captured for the fifth time since its first capture in 2000, and each capture was near Ambush Rock (rkm 244.4-244.8). Eleven burbot were tagged with five-month duration external sonic transmitters, and a 12th burbot, tagged with a 14-month transmitter, has been monitored since 2001. During the post-spawn period, three sonic-tagged burbot exhibited downstream and sedentary movement patterns, while five remained at Ambush Rock. Concentrations of tagged burbot near Ambush Rock (rkm 244.5) during January and February 2004 (eight tagged fish) may suggest that this area is critical spawning habitat. The appearance of burbot at Ambush Rock during the spawning period and upstream movements of tagged fish (PIT and sonic tagged) in previous years during the low discharges help validate results suggesting that discharges <113 m{sup 3}/s will permit burbot migration and may increase spawning habitat. Though it seems apparent that the Ambush Rock area is an important burbot spawning ground, no adult burbot were recaptured after the spawning period and no burbot larva were caught, despite considerable sampling efforts during the winter of 2003-2004.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".