Cohort strength and body size in co-occurring salmonids in a small stream network: variation in space and time
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Trout and salmon commonly coexist in stream networks. Exploring similarities and differences among species can help explain coexistence and invasive ability. Here, we describe spatial distribution, cohort strengths and size-at-age of three co-occurring species in a small stream network. Spatial distributions varied dramatically among species; native brook trout (Salvellinus fontinalis) occupied all stream reaches, naturalized brown trout (Salmo trutta) were found in the mainstem and lower portions of tributaries and fry-stocked Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) were limited to the mainstem. Size-at-age also differed among species, Atlantic salmon were consistently the smallest, brook trout were intermediate in size and brown trout were the largest. Despite size differences, mean lengths of brook trout and brown trout were highly correlated among years. Cohort strengths varied considerably across years but were also highly correlated for the two trout species, suggesting strong environmental control on cohort strength and a reduced role for species interactions. At low densities, we observed strong negative effects of density on body sizes and weaker effects otherwise. Overall, these results suggest differences in spatial distribution combined with similarities in response to environmental variation contribute to species coexistence in this small steam network.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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".