Eulachon migration patterns in the lower Fraser River revealed through acoustic telemetry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objective The Fraser River in British Columbia, Canada, historically supported productive Indigenous, recreational, and commercial fisheries for Eulachon Thaleichthys pacificus. Although Eulachon spend most of their lives in the marine environment, they spawn in freshwater and it is hypothesized that habitat degradation in the Fraser River has contributed to population decline. A greater understanding of Eulachon life history strategies is necessary to develop species recovery strategies. The purpose of this study was to provide insight into population demographics, migration timing, residence time, travel speed and distance, and movement patterns of Eulachon traveling in the Fraser River by conducting index netting and acoustic telemetry. Methods In total, 244 Eulachon were acoustically tagged at the mouth of the Fraser River, and their movements were monitored using acoustic receivers in the lowermost 70 km of the Fraser River and in the Pitt River (a tributary to the Fraser River) over a 2-year period. Result Tagged Eulachon displayed heterogeneous movement behaviors and a protracted migration period between February and May. Eulachon index gill netting revealed three discrete migration groups matching traditional ecological knowledge from Indigenous knowledge holders. There were shifts in population demographics, with sex ratios changing from predominately males to females throughout the migration. Residence time within the estuarine salt wedge and river was short. Upstream travel speeds varied significantly between sexes and slowed as fish traveled upstream. Conclusion Overall, Eulachon travel speeds, travel distances, and residence times, along with size and sex effects, provided insights into movement patterns. These results will increase our understanding of sex-specific risks related to instream disturbance, harvest, and predation and will inform management decisions regarding protection of critical habitats. The observed patterns highlight the need for stock assessment methods to consider all discrete migration groups and will assist in prioritizing species recovery efforts.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".