Mixed‐stock analysis using Rapture genotyping to evaluate stock‐specific exploitation of a walleye population despite weak genetic structure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Mixed‐stock analyses using genetic markers have informed fisheries management in cases where strong genetic differentiation occurs among local spawning populations, yet many fisheries are supported by multiple, weakly differentiated stocks. Freshwater fisheries exemplify this problem, with many populations supported by multiple stocks of young evolutionary age and isolated across small spatial scales. Consequently, attempts to conduct genetic mixed‐stock analyses of inland fisheries have often been unsuccessful. Advances in genomic sequencing offer the ability to discriminate among populations with weak population structure, providing the necessary resolution to conduct mixed‐stock assignment among previously indistinguishable stocks. We used genomic data to conduct a mixed‐stock analysis of eastern Lake Erie's commercial and recreational walleye ( Sander vitreus ) fisheries and estimate the relative harvest of weakly differentiated stocks (pairwise F ST < 0.01). Using RAD‐capture (Rapture), we sequenced and genotyped individuals from western and eastern basin local spawning stocks at 12,081 loci with 95% reassignment accuracy, which was not possible in the past using microsatellite markers. A baseline assessment of 395 walleye from 11 spawning stocks identified three reporting groups and refined previous assessments of gene flow among walleye stocks. Genetic assignment of 1,075 walleye harvested in eastern Lake Erie's recreational and commercial fisheries indicated that western basin stocks constituted the majority of harvest during the peak walleye fishing season (July–September), whereas eastern basin individuals comprised much of the early season harvest (May–June). Clear spatial structure in harvest composition existed; catches in more easterly sites contained more individuals of eastern basin origin than did more westerly sites. Our study provides important stock contribution estimates for Lake Erie fishery management and demonstrates the utility of genomic data to facilitate mixed‐stock analysis in exploited fish populations having weak population structure or limited existing genetic resources.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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".