The response of a brown trout (<i>Salmo trutta</i>) population to reintroduced Eurasian beaver (<i>Castor fiber</i>) habitat modification
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Globally, freshwaters are the most degraded and threatened of all ecosystems. In northern temperate regions, beaver (Castor spp.) reintroductions are increasingly used as a low-cost and self-sustaining means to restore river corridors. River modifications by beavers can increase availability of suitable habitat for fish, including salmonids. This study investigated the response of a population of brown trout (Salmo trutta) to reintroduced Eurasian beaver (Castor fiber) habitat modifications in northern Scotland. The field site comprised two streams entering a common loch; one modified by beavers, the other unaltered. Electrofishing and PIT telemetry surveys indicated abundance of post-young-of-the-year (post-YOY) trout was higher in the modified stream. Considering juvenile year groups (YOY and post-YOY) combined, abundance and density varied with year and season. In the modified stream, fork length and mass were greater, there was a greater variety of age classes, and mean growth was positive during all seasons. Beavers had profound effects on the local brown trout population that promoted higher abundances of larger size classes. This study provides important insight into the possible future effect of beavers on freshwater ecosystems.
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".