Muskellunge Management: Fifty Years of Cooperation Among Anglers, Scientists, and Fisheries Biologists
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<em>Abstract</em>.—Genetic assessment of Muskellunge <em>Esox masquinongy </em>in Lake Simcoe, Ontario is being used to inform ongoing management and rehabilitation efforts. Muskellunge were historically abundant in Lake Simcoe and supported a commercial fishery in the late 19th century, but the population collapsed in the mid-20th century due to a combination of overharvest, habitat loss, and other stressors. Several decades of supplemental stocking failed to prevent the loss of Muskellunge from Lake Simcoe. As part of the recent effort to re-establish Muskellunge in the watershed, we assessed the historical genetics of the Lake Simcoe population using archived scale samples (1960s to 1990s) to resolve its relationship with historical and recent stocking sources. Based on data from 20 microsatellite loci, we found no evidence that the original Lake Simcoe population was closely related to contemporary Great Lakes populations as has been suggested. Rather, the majority of historical Muskellunge samples appear to be more closely related to populations in the contiguous Kawartha Lakes and Lake Couchiching. Recent captures of immigrant Muskellunge adults from the Kawartha Lakes in Lake Simcoe suggest that conditions are once again suitable for supporting Muskellunge.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.012 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".