Conflicts among protected native birds and valuable sport fishes: potential pelican predation effects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reservoirs are examples of novel ecosystems that have developed into popular sport fisheries; these systems are also becoming seasonal refuges for migratory birds, including the piscivorous American white pelican ( Pelecanus erythrorhynchos). We (1) investigated the proportion of cutthroat trout ( Oncorhynchus clarkii utah) and other species consumed by pelicans, (2) compared whether pelicans have an adverse effect on cutthroat trout spawning movement, and (3) determined the importance of pelican predation relative to other sources of fish mortality in Strawberry Reservoir, Utah, USA. Pelican diet samples consisted of >85% Utah sucker ( Catostomus ardens), 6% Utah chub ( Gila atraria), and 3% cutthroat trout. Based on bioenergetics, we estimated that pelicans consumed 384–3020 individual cutthroat trout (0.17%–1.3% of population), in contrast to 14 166–27 196 nongame sucker and chub. Bird-related mortality rate ranged from 1% to 6% for stocked, PIT (passive integrated transponder)-tagged adult cutthroat trout and from 4% to 16% for subadult cutthroat trout. Based on these results, any management action taken to control pelican predation would need to be weighed against the benefits of nongame fish removal and the protected status of pelicans.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".