MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2947301882 · doi:10.1002/rra.3426

Partial dam removal restores passage for a threatened salmonid

2019· article· en· W2947301882 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Brittany G. Sullivan, Mark K. Taylor, Chris Carli, Taylor D. Ward, Robert J. Lennox, Steven J. Cooke

Bibliographic record

VenueRiver Research and Applications · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaParks CanadaCarleton University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsTroutThreatened speciesForagingFisheryEnvironmental scienceHydrology (agriculture)HabitatFish <Actinopterygii>EcologyBiologyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Dams represent one of the major forms of river alteration. As these structures reach the end of their lifespan, they often require extensive refurbishments or removal. A small‐scale water supply dam in Banff National Park (Alberta, Canada) was partially removed, creating a breach that allowed water to scour a new passage resembling a nature‐like fishway. We investigated the permeability of the partially removed dam as a means of validating the conservation benefits of the partial dam removal. We quantified the proportion of bull trout ( Salvelinus confluentus ), a threatened species in Canada, that approached and passed the fishway using radio telemetry receiver stations. The proportion of bull trout that approached the fishway was low (37.0%; N = 27 of 73), but was consistent with upstream reference sites (33%; N = 20 of 60). For those that did approach, the proportion of bull trout that passed yielded a high passage efficiency (77.8%; N = 21 of 27 that approached). The probability that a fish passed the fishway was related to water depth and time of day. Bull trout were more likely to pass when water depths were high (&gt;0.40 m), and at night. Passage duration ranged from 5‐mins to 13‐days, suggesting that this resident species used the fishway for a variety of purposes (e.g., station holding and foraging) and not just transiting. Some individuals underwent large‐scale movements 2‐km upstream (15.1%; N = 11 of 73), or 2‐km downstream (2.7%; N = 2 of 73) following a successful passage event. This study provides new insight on how, in some instances, a breach in a dam can function as a nature‐like fishway, accommodating year‐round stream flows and providing hydraulic conditions suitable for fish passage without costly engineering or construction.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.328
Threshold uncertainty score0.888

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.042
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.287 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations8
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRiver Research and ApplicationsSame topicFish Ecology and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207