MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4404287931 · doi:10.1016/j.jglr.2024.102463

Predicting the response of fish populations to changes in river connectivity using individual-based models

2024· article· en· W4404287931 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Shane Flinn, Travis O. Brenden, Kelly Robinson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Great Lakes Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFish <Actinopterygii>Environmental scienceFisheryHydrology (agriculture)BiologyGeologyGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Barrier removal restores physical stream processes and improves accessibility of critical habitats to migratory fishes. Although increasing connectivity benefits stream systems and migratory fishes, barrier removals may also lead to increased production of undesirable or invasive migratory species, as well as myriad other concerns (e.g., reduced recreational opportunities). Few studies have predicted how migratory fish populations will respond to enhanced fish passage, despite being a critical step in the decision-making process. We developed an individual-based model framework to forecast the response of migratory fishes to changes in connectivity and applied the framework to six species under multiple fish passage scenarios for the FishPass project on the Boardman River, MI, which outlets into Lake Michigan. Population response to barrier removal was species-specific and varied based on initial population size and distribution within the watershed, number of fish passed upstream, and species life history traits. Species restricted to below the barrier prior to removal benefitted most; non-native species were found to have greater production potential under full passage scenarios than native Great Lakes species. With increasing passage of non-native Pacific salmonids, steelhead Oncorhynchus mykiss surpassed brook trout Salvelinus fontinalis as the system’s dominant species. Our results will inform decision-makers on management alternatives for fish passage on the Boardman River and our model framework can be modified, updated, and applied to additional river systems as more barrier removal projects are conducted in the future.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.099
Threshold uncertainty score0.198

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.162
GPT teacher head0.378
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Great Lakes Research→Same topicFish Ecology and Management Studies→French-language works237,207→