Conservation ecology of a unique population of lake chub (Cyprinidae: Couesius plumbeus) : population size, movement ecology, habitat use and potential interactions with the exotic cherry shrimp (Neocaridina davidi var. red)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research investigated a population of lake chub (Couesius plumbeus) inhabiting a geothermal spring complex south of the community of Atlin, in the far northwest of British Columbia. These lake chub live in thermal isolation in 13-26°C water year round, while the only neighbouring water body, glacier-fed Atlin Lake, remains below 6°C year round and has no known population of lake chub. Through mark-recapture sampling I estimated the population size of this isolated and physiologically distinct population to be on the order of 1,000 to 2,000 mature individuals. I measured its area of occupancy as 3,602m². As such, the population is small in both habitat extent and population size, as well as being physically isolated from other populations of this widespread species. Tagging of fish in individual sections of the warm springs showed a general lack of movement among different sites. Size-frequency histograms for individual sites and points in time illustrated the presence of distinct cohorts suggesting lifespans of three to four years, with outliers living a year or two longer. I also studied the invasive cherry shrimp (Neocaridina davidi var. red), performing experiments to observe survivorship and behaviour under different temperature regimes. I found no significant decrease in mortality in adults when water was cooled to 5°C, but a significant reduction in their ability to react to stimuli below 15°C. I also observed 100% mortality in juveniles at water temperatures of 10°C or lower within two days. Based on these data, barring future adaptation to considerably colder conditions, is unlikely that cherry shrimp will be able to expand their range further into the Yukon River basin. Overall, my study provides a baseline of understanding about the population and life history of an isolated warm-springs population of lake chub, and provides observations of the early stages and probable outcomes of an exotic species invading an isolated location.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".