Variation in estuary use patterns of juvenile Chinook salmon in the Fraser River, BC
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Juvenile Pacific salmon ( Oncorhynchus spp.) use estuary habitats to varying degrees with some species and populations thought to rely heavily on these areas for early growth. In the Fraser River, British Columbia, there are 18 distinct conservation units of Chinook salmon ( O. tshawytscha), and all but one is of conservation concern. Our study compares the outmigration timing, size, and habitat use of juvenile Chinook salmon in the Fraser River estuary. Over 5 years (2016–2020), we captured 6493 juvenile Chinook salmon, with 3318 sampled for stock identification. Fraser River Chinook salmon extensively used estuary habitats, but patterns varied considerably by population. Juvenile Chinook salmon from the Lower Fraser River were most abundant and present the longest, arriving the smallest in late March and early April, and captured until July. South Thompson ocean-type Chinook salmon entered the estuary later, starting to arrive in late May or early June and remaining present until mid-August. Overall, juvenile Chinook salmon varied considerably in their estuary use across populations. Understanding this variation can inform differences in productivity and guide recovery actions.
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 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".