Fitness consequences of hybridization between wild Newfoundland and farmed European and North American Atlantic salmon
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Selection due to multi-generational domestication and genetically distinct origins raises concerns about potential fitness consequences of hybridization between farmed and wild Atlantic salmon. In Newfoundland (NF), Canada, the aquaculture industry uses the North American (NA) Saint John River strain, though site-specific permission has been granted to farm a European origin (EO) strain. We used complementary experiments to investigate differences in (1) dominance status and (2) growth and survival in allopatry (NF wild fish) versus sympatry (NF wild fish with NA/EO farmed individuals and related F1 hybrids) in contrasting tank and semi-natural stream environments. NA farmed salmon were more dominant than NF wild individuals, with hybrids being intermediate in expression and not differing from wild fish. EO farmed salmon also tended to dominate NF wild individuals, but not significantly. Competition with farmed fish and hybrids did not affect the growth of wild fish in sympatry versus allopatry in the tank environment. However, that was not the case in one instance in the stream environment where wild fish in sympatry with NA farmed fish and hybrids outgrew those in allopatry. Within sympatric treatments, both EO and NA farmed salmon outgrew wild individuals in the tank environment, but not always in the stream environment (exception: NA farmed). Hybrids tended to display intermediate growth performance relative to farmed and wild fish in both environments. Survival did not differ among cross types in either environment. These findings suggest that irrespective of distinct origins, both EO and NA farmed salmon displayed greater dominance and growth than NF wild salmon in the tank environment. However, in the stream environment, competition imposed by NA farmed fish and related hybrids on wild fish appeared less than that imposed by the EO strain and related hybrids, as evident in growth performance. Findings thus provide valuable insight into the effects of hybridization and, consequently, fitness-related trait differences among divergent EO and NA farmed, NF wild, and F1 hybrid populations of importance for the conservation and management of Atlantic salmon.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".