The riverscape meets the soundscape: acoustic cues and habitat use by brook trout in a small stream
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hydromorphological descriptors such as substrate type, water depth, and velocity are commonly used to describe fish habitat, but few studies have focused on how underwater sounds affect habitat use by freshwater fish. We evaluated the influence of the underwater soundscape and other habitat descriptors on the spatial distribution of brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis) in a small stream in eastern Canada. Habitat measurements were made at high spatial resolution (2.5 m intervals). High acoustical heterogeneity of stream habitats (40–150 dB re 1 μPa) was related to differences in water velocity and depth as expected from theory. Brook trout densities were positively related to broadband sound pressure levels (SPL), irrespective of water velocity and depth, but in interaction with habitat type. The positive relationship between brook trout densities and SPL could be related to the high auditory threshold of salmonid fishes. Alternatively, brook trout may use the underwater soundscape to select favourable feeding habitats. Underwater sounds integrate the many environmental dimensions of a stream and may be used by fish as cues for habitat selection.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".