Effect of catch‐and‐release and temperature at release on reproductive success of Atlantic salmon (<i>Salmo salar</i> L.) in the Rimouski River, Québec, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Catch‐and‐release fishing is a common conservation practice in recreational fisheries for Atlantic Salmon, although the effects on the reproductive success of caught‐and‐released fish are poorly understood. Herein, we compared the relative reproductive success of caught‐and‐released to non‐caught salmon and tested the effect of temperature at release on reproductive success in the Rimouski River, Québec, Canada. At least 83% of caught‐and‐released salmon that moved upstream of a dam successfully reproduced, including fish that have been released in water above 20°C. However, the reproductive success of caught‐and‐released female salmon was only 73% of the reproductive success of non‐caught salmon. Moreover, the increasing temperature did not affect the reproductive success of released fish that entered a trap, but fish caught at warmer temperatures were less likely to enter the trap. Our findings should be useful for evaluating the risks and benefits of catch‐and‐release, and for optimising conservation practices used for the preservation of Atlantic salmon populations.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".