Evaluation of management factors affecting the relative success of a brook trout eradication program using YY male fish and electrofishing suppression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Removal of non-native fish populations can be crucial to the conservation of native species, but often presents a complex challenge for managers. The goal of Trojan Y chromosome (TYC) programs is to skew the non-native sex ratio until only males remain, leading to eradication. We present results from a simulation model used to explore effects of alternative management approaches on an in-progress mechanical removal and TYC program to eradicate non-native brook trout (Salvelinus fontinalis). Simulation results indicated that stocking fingerling YY males (∼137 mm) was more effective than stocking catchable-sized YY males (∼230 mm), although questions about intercohort competition warrant further investigation. Increasing the proportion of mature fingerling YY males reduced treatment time by increasing the number of YY male spawners and increasing density-dependent mortality on young, mature wild brook trout. Maximizing the spatial distribution of YY male releases may be crucial to program success but is also dependent upon immediate dispersal movements. Principles derived from our results can be broadly applied to the management of other aquatic invaded systems using TYC programs to eradicate non-native species.
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 | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".