Multi-indicator evidence for habitat use and trophic strategy segregation of two sympatric forms of Arctic char from the Cumberland Sound region of Nunavut, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We analyzed Arctic char (Salvelinus alpinus (Linnaeus, 1758)) stable isotope ratios and fatty acid composition from two geographically proximal Nunavut lakes, Qasigiyat and Iqalugaarjuit, to determine if anadromous and resident Arctic char occupied different trophic niches. Resident Arctic char had lower δ 13 C and δ 34 S, indicative of freshwater feeding, compared with anadromous individuals. Significantly lower δ 15 N of residents suggests the ecotypes feed at different trophic levels. Significantly wider δ 13 C and δ 15 N ranges in residents implied a broader trophic niche or a wider range in baseline prey isotope values. Results also provide further evidence for resident use of the estuarine environment in Qasigiyat. Immature Arctic char occupy a different trophic niche than both resident and anadromous fish within Iqalugaarjuit, but this relationship is less clear in Qasigiyat. Distinct stable isotope and fatty acid profiles indicate that resident and anadromous Arctic char have distinct trophic niches: marine for anadromous, freshwater for resident. Immature Arctic char seem to occupy a distinct niche from both anadromous and resident fish, which likely relates to use of both freshwater and estuarine environments, depending on developmental stage. We show the first evidence of the fatty acid differences and niche segregation between sympatric anadromous and resident ecotypes in Arctic char.
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 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".