MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3131737938 · doi:10.1139/cjfas-2020-0398

Foraging modes and movements of <i>Oncorhynchus mykiss</i> as flow and invertebrate drift recede in a California stream

2021· article· en· W3131737938 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Gabriel J. Rossi, Mary E. Power, Shelley Pneh, Jason R. Neuswanger, Timothy J. Caldwell

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Reserve System, University of CaliforniaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsForagingBenthic zonePredationRiffleEcologyEnvironmental scienceRainbow troutSTREAMSOncorhynchusInvertebrateBiologyHabitatFisheryFish <Actinopterygii>

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Salmonids frequently adapt their feeding and movement strategies to cope with seasonally fluctuating stream environments. Oncorhynchus mykiss tend to drift-forage in higher velocity habitat than other salmonids, yet their presence in streams with seasonally low velocity and drift suggests behavioral flexibility. We combined 3D videogrammetry with measurements of invertebrate drift and stream hydraulics to investigate the drivers of O. mykiss foraging mode and movement during the seasonal recession in a California stream. From May to July (2016), foraging movement rate increased as prey concentration and velocity declined; however, movement decreased in August as pools became low and still. In May, 80% of O. mykiss were drift-foraging, while by July, over 70% used search or benthic-foraging modes. Velocity and riffle crest depth were significant predictors of foraging mode, while drift concentration was a poor univariate predictor. However, top-ranked additive models included both hydraulic variables and drift concentration. A drift-foraging bioenergetic model was a poor predictor of foraging mode. We suggest that infall and benthic prey, as well as risk aversion, may influence late-summer foraging decisions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.117
Threshold uncertainty score0.233

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.193 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations25
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences→Same topicFish Ecology and Management Studies→French-language works237,207→