Temperature preference, aerobic scope and upper thermal tolerance in sympatric juvenile chinook slamon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) and coho salmon (O. kisutch)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Wild Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) and coho salmon (O. kisutch) from the Horsefly River in central British Columbia vary in adult migration timing, but often rear sympatrically as juveniles. These species provide an interesting opportunity to investigate adaptations to the environment in the juvenile life-history stage, which may differ from adaptations at the adult stage. Temperature preference did not differ significantly between Chinook salmon and coho salmon. Aerobic scope (difference between maximum and routine metabolic rates) was also similar between the two species, and neither showed a distinct temperature optimum for peak physiological performance. Coho salmon had a significantly higher upper thermal limit compared to Chinook salmon, although differences were small and may not be biologically meaningful. Thus, these two populations appear to be well adapted for their current environmental conditions rather than show any tendencies to be differentially suited to selective pressures they will experience as adults.
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 | 0.000 | 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".