Surprising salmonid response to water diversion at four run-of-river hydroelectric projects in British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Run-of-river (RoR) hydroelectric power provides renewable energy with potentially less impact on fish habitat productivity than large, reservoir-storage hydroelectric projects. This is the first empirical study of resident fish response to water diversion at RoR projects in BC, where the abundance of rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) was monitored in four small streams using a before–after control–impact design. Although flows in the diversion reaches of these projects were reduced by 63% to 70%, the total biomass of rainbow trout increased from 35% to 157% across the streams compared with the “before period” and “control reaches”. The response to water diversion differed among age classes: adult biomass increased with reduced flows in the growing season; juvenile biomass increased with reduced flows in the winter, higher stream conductivity, and increased flows in late summer; and fry biomass increased with higher stream conductivity and temperatures. One novel way to contextualize these shifts in resident salmonid productivity and differential growth and (or) survival by age class is via a size–density approach, which we use here to demonstrate how the carrying capacity of a stream for rainbow trout is affected by water diversion.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".