State-space analysis of power to detect regional brook trout population trends over time
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Threats to aquatic biodiversity are expressed at broad spatial scales, but identifying regional trends in abundance is challenging owing to variable sampling designs and temporal and spatial variation in abundance. We compiled a regional data set of brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) counts across their southern range representing 326 sites from eight states between 1982 and 2014 and conducted a statistical power analysis using Bayesian state-space models to evaluate the ability to detect temporal trends by characterizing posterior distributions with three approaches. A combination of monitoring periods, number of sites and electrofishing passes, decline magnitude, and different revisit patterns were tested. Power increased with monitoring periods and decline magnitude. Trends in adults were better detected than young-of-the-year fish, which showed greater interannual variation in abundance. The addition of weather covariates to account for the temporal variation increased power only slightly. Single- and three-pass electrofishing methods were similar in power. Finally, power was higher for sampling designs with more frequent revisits over the duration of the monitoring program. Our results provide guidance for broad-scale monitoring designs for temporal trend detection.
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 | 0.024 | 0.079 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".