Running on empty? Freshwater feeding by spawning anadromous alewife <scp><i>Alosa pseudoharengus</i></scp>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Anadromous alewife Alosa pseudoharengus (n = 202; mean ± s.d. fork length = 231 ± 14 mm) were captured from 10 May to 27 June 2018 in an upper watershed lake on the Isthmus of Chignecto, Canada (45°57′N, 64°14′W). Thirty individuals (mean ± s.d. fork length = 250 ± 12 mm) were captured in an adjacent estuary downstream of a tide gate on 25 April 2018. Comparing estuarine to freshwater specimens, mean gonad mass and gonadosomatic indices in males and females decreased approximately 40% and 60%, and 31% and 50%, respectively. Individuals were characterized as pre‐spawners in the estuary and spawners in the lake. Males maintained similar body condition throughout the spawning run whereas female condition decreased 9.4% between the estuary and lake. Stomach fullness decreased comparing estuarine and freshwater specimens, yet 93% of stomachs examined from individuals captured in the lake contained prey. Most males fed throughout all spawning stages (3%–17% empty stomachs), while all females fed during pre‐ and post‐spawning stages and some fasted during spawning (11% empty stomachs). Cumulative prey curve never reached an asymptote, either weekly or for the entire sampling period, so freshwater diet may not have been completely described. Calanoid copepods (79.3%IA) were a diet staple, with the secondary prey of mayfly nymphs (O. Ephemeroptera) consumed more by females (13.6%IA) than males (6.2%IA). PERMANOVA and PERMDISP analyses revealed significant dietary differences in freshwater were weekly and not due to dispersion effects, thus most likely due to feeding on various development stages of insect species. Our results challenge the long‐held paradigm that anadromous A. pseudoharengus fast during the spawning migration.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.003 | 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".