Coloured LED light as a potential behavioural guidance tool for age 0 and 2 year walleye <i>Sander vitreus</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Based on existing laboratory research on the visual physiology of walleye Sander vitreus, we tested colours of known spectral sensitivity (i.e., green and orange) using constant and strobing (5 Hz) illumination with an LED-based light guidance device (LGD). Hatchery-reared age 0 and 2 years S. vitreus were exposed to these four light combinations as well as an unilluminated control treatment during day and night trials. Age 2 years S. vitreus generally avoided the LGD when light was produced (negative phototaxis) compared with the control, with continuous illumination having a greater effect than strobing. The proportions of both age 0 and 2 year fish exiting illuminating zones of the trial arena did not differ with light colour or strobe rate, suggesting that phototactic behaviours in S. vitreus do not change with ontogeny in these age classes. Our findings confirm that typical behavioural responses of S. vitreus to light stimuli are characterised by avoidance and provide evidence that the use of light for behavioural guidance (deterrence) may be effective at reducing entrainment and impingement of this species on hydraulic barriers during migrations, independent of ontogenetic stage.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".