Limits on performance and survival of juvenile sockeye salmon (<i>Oncorhynchus nerka</i>) during food deprivation: a laboratory-based study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
) may migrate over 1000 km from their freshwater nursery habitats to estuary and ocean feeding grounds. During the period corresponding to the seaward migration of sockeye salmon, we held smolts in the laboratory to ask the following: (i) Does non-feeding migration duration influence prolonged swim performance and survival? (ii) What are the relationships between individual body condition and swim performance and survival? Wild sockeye salmon were intercepted during their migration and held without food for up to 61 days to represent the non-feeding freshwater migration and the extremes of poor estuary habitat. We conducted 40 sets of prolonged swim trials on 319 fish from 3 treatment groups that represented entrance to the marine environment on (i) an average,(ii) a delayed and (iii) a severely delayed migration schedule. Experimentally controlled freshwater migration duration did not impact swim performance or survival. Swim performance decreased concomitant with condition factor, where smolts with a Fulton's condition factor of <0.69 were less likely (<50% probability) to complete the swim test (90 min swim test, at ~0.50 m/s). Survival of salmon smolts in the laboratory was less likely at energy densities of less than 3.47 MJ/kg. Swim performance decreased much sooner than survival, suggesting that swim performance, and therefore condition factor, may be a good indicator of survival of migratory smolts, as fish with reduced swim performance will likely be predated. These two relationships, one more ecologically relevant and one more clinical, help reveal the limits of long-distance migration for juvenile salmon and can be used to determine population-specific starvation risk associated with various freshwater and marine habitat conditions.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".