Combining fixed-location count data and movement data to estimate abundance of a lake sturgeon spawning run: a framework for riverine migratory species
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Estimating abundance of migrating fishes is challenging. While sonars can be deployed continuously, improper assumptions about unidirectional migration and complete spatial coverage can lead to inaccurate estimates. To address these challenges, we present a framework for combining fixed-location count data from a dual-frequency identification sonar (DIDSON) with movement data from acoustic telemetry to estimate spawning run abundance of lake sturgeon (Acipenser fulvescens). Acoustic telemetry data were used to estimate the probability of observing a lake sturgeon on the DIDSON and to determine the probability that a lake sturgeon passing the DIDSON site had passed the site previously during the season. Combining probabilities with DIDSON counts, using a Bayesian integrated model, we estimated the following abundances: 99 (42–215 credible interval, CI) in 2017, 131 (82–248 CI) in 2018, and 92 (47–184 CI) in 2019. Adding movement data generated better inferences on count data by incorporating fish behavior (e.g., multiple migrations in a single season) and its uncertainty into abundance estimates. This framework can be applied to count and movement data to estimate abundance of spawning runs of other migratory fishes in riverine systems.
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 | 0.025 | 0.035 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".