MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4377244694 · doi:10.1111/fme.12632

In‐stream population structuring of Lake Sturgeon in Northern Manitoba, Canada

2023· article· en· W4377244694 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Patrick A. Nelson, Thierry Gosselin, C. A. McDougall, Louis Bernatchez

Bibliographic record

VenueFisheries Management and Ecology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersManitoba Hydro
KeywordsStockingSturgeonLake sturgeonBiological dispersalRange (aeronautics)BayGeographyFisheryPopulationEcologyAcipenserFish <Actinopterygii>BiologyArchaeologyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Lake Sturgeon is a long‐lived, late‐maturing fish that declined significantly in abundance over the past 150 years. Since the 1990s, stocking has been used to recover numerous Lake Sturgeon populations across North America. Ill‐informed genetic mixing among populations can have unintended negative consequences, so a genotype‐by‐sequencing (GBS) study was undertaken to help guide the stocking strategy for Lake Sturgeon on the 653‐km‐long Nelson River, Manitoba. Tissue samples collected from 416 adults captured from 12 locations along the Nelson River, and from the Hayes and Churchill rivers that also empty into Hudson Bay, were sequenced using Illumina technology. A bioinformatics pipeline yielded 5637 high‐quality filtered markers. Genetic differentiation (overall mean F ST of 0.028; a range of means: 0–0.16) revealed spatial structuring among and within rivers. Two populations were found in the upper Nelson River, two more in the middle Nelson, and one in the lower Nelson. Discriminant analysis of principal components revealed first‐generation migrants and a general lack of effective dispersal, which raises questions about historical versus contemporary influence. Lake Sturgeon stocking in northern Manitoba should avoid mixing among rivers and among Nelson River sections.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.867
Threshold uncertainty score0.873

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.175
Teacher spread0.168 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFisheries Management and EcologySame topicFish Ecology and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207