Age structure of natural versus hatchery-origin endangered Chinook salmon and implications for fisheries management in California
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Maturation schedules shape the age structure of a population and influence productivity and exposure to fishing. Fish cultivated and raised in artificial environments such as hatcheries may mature at different ages compared to their natural-origin counterparts. We evaluated whether endangered Sacramento River winter-run Chinook salmon Oncorhynchus tshawytscha produced in a conservation hatchery had different maturation schedules compared to natural-origin fish, and how any differences affected their exposure to, and impact from, the ocean salmon fishery. Using coded-wire tags collected from hatchery fish in the ocean and in-river fisheries and on the spawning grounds, and scales collected from natural-origin spawner carcasses, we reconstructed the life history of hatchery and natural-origin cohorts from 2002-2015 brood years. Hatchery fish had similar age-2 maturation rates but higher age-3 maturation rates compared to natural-origin fish, resulting in fewer age-4 individuals and an overall more truncated age structure. Because natural-origin winter-run Chinook salmon were more likely to remain at sea until age 4, they were exposed to fishing for an additional year and experienced greater reduction in escapement. Compared to natural-origin males, hatchery-origin males were much less likely to return at an older age, possibly because sexual selection that is occurring on the spawning grounds is not occurring to the same extent in the hatchery. Identifying how reproductive maturation differs across sources, sex, and life histories is critical to understanding how fisheries can disproportionately impact subsets of a population and affect its long-term population dynamics and sustainability.
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".