Movements of selected minnows between the lower Yellowstone River and its tributaries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reduced population connectivity has been implicated as a cause of decreased distributions and abundances of many Great Plains fishes. However, scant empirical evidence quantifying movement and relating the contribution of spatial linkages to population abundances and resilience exists. We used otolith microchemistry analysis to characterize the movements of western silvery minnows (Hybognathus argyritis Girard, 1856), flathead chubs (Platygobio gracilis (Richardson, 1836)), and sand shiners (Notropis stramineus (Cope, 1865)) between the Yellowstone River and its tributaries. Sixty-nine percent of western silvery minnows, 65% of flathead chubs, and 42% of sand shiners moved between the Yellowstone River and tributaries. Mean total number of interchanges was highest among western silvery minnows (4.8 interchanges/mover), intermediate among flathead chubs (4.3 interchanges/mover), and lowest among sand shiners (1.4 interchanges/mover; P < 0.01). Natal movements were rare, but juvenile movements were common and frequent among all three species. Movements between main-stem and tributary habitats are probably prominent facets of the life cycles of other Great Plains minnows. Therefore, connectivity among such habitats should be a high conservation priority to enhance the long-term viability of such fishes.
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 | 0.000 | 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".