MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4391846260 · doi:10.1139/cjfas-2023-0246

A review of adult salmon maximum swim performance

2024· review· en· W4391846260 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Krista Kraskura, David A. Patterson, Erika J. Eliason

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityFisheries and Oceans Canada
FundersUniversity of California, Santa BarbaraPacific Salmon Commission
KeywordsFisheryBiologyEnvironmental scienceEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Salmonids undertake long and strenuous migrations that require aerobic endurance and anaerobic burst swimming. Anthropogenic activity and natural disasters can make already challenging migrations even more difficult. This reinvigorates a central question: what is the maximum swimming capacity of adult salmon species across environmental conditions? We synthesized literature on adult salmon swim performance ( Oncorhynchus spp. and Salmo salar) to unfold what is known about how biological (sex and body size) and physical (temperature) factors affect swimming in adult salmon. Maximum anaerobic swimming—bursting, jumping, and leaping—are among the least studied swim performances in adult salmonids. Commonly, swim performance has been measured using swim flumes, but evidently adult salmon can swim faster in the wild than this set-up can capture. We show that larger fish can outswim smaller ones, and that thermal sensitivity of swimming differs inter-and -intra-specifically. Unresolved are how anaerobic swimming differs across temperatures, between males and females and across maturity states. This information can be used to inform exercise physiology research and future management and mitigation actions necessary to conserve these iconic, economically valuable species.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations16
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences→Same topicFish Ecology and Management Studies→French-language works237,207→