Population abundance in arctic grayling using genetics and close‐kin mark‐recapture
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Arctic Grayling ( Thymallus arcticus ) are among the most widely distributed and abundant freshwater fish in the Yukon Territory of Canada, yet little information exists regarding their broad and fine‐scale population structures or the number and size of these populations. The estimation of population abundance is fundamental for robust management and conservation, yet estimating abundance in the wild is often difficult. Here, we estimated abundance of an Arctic Grayling population using multiple genetic markers and the close‐kin mark‐recapture (CKMR) method. A total of N = 1,104 Arctic Grayling collected from two systems in Yukon were genotyped at 38 sequenced microsatellites. We first identified structure and assessed genetic diversity (effective population size, ). Collections from one of the systems (Lubbock River) comprised adults and young‐of‐the‐year sampled independently allowing the identification of parent–offspring pairs (POPs), and thus, the estimation of abundance using CKMR. We used COLONY and CKMRsim to identify POPs and both provided similar results leading to indistinguishable estimates (95% CI) of census size, that is, = 1858 (1259–2457) and 1812 (1229–2389). The accuracy of the population abundance estimates can in the future be improved with temporal sampling and more precise age or size‐specific fecundity estimates for Arctic Grayling. Our study demonstrates that the method can be used to inform management and conservation policy for Arctic Grayling and likely also for other fish species for which the assumption of random and independent sampling of adults and offspring can be assured.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".