MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407606868 · doi:10.1111/faf.12887

Salmonid Biomass in Streams Around the World: A Quantitative Synthesis

2025· article· en· W4407606868 on OpenAlexafffund
Kyleisha J. Foote, James W. A. Grant, Pascale M. Biron

Bibliographic record

VenueFish and Fisheries · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaGroupe de recherche interuniversitaire en limnologie
KeywordsBiomass (ecology)STREAMSEnvironmental scienceFisheryEcologyBiologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Salmonid fishes are one of the best studied fish taxa, but little is known about their biomass distribution. We created a dataset using published material for over 1000 rivers with estimated salmonid biomass, covering 27 countries, and 11 species. The distribution of salmonid biomass and production across streams was skewed to the right with a mean biomass and production of 5.2 g/m2 (range = 0–70.3 g/m2) and 6.3 g/m2/year (range = 0.03–50.2 g/m2/year), respectively. The top 10% and 1% of salmonid streams in the world had a biomass > 11.9 and 36.5 g/m2, respectively, and a production > 13.9 and 25.6 g/m2/year, respectively. Salmonid production was positively correlated with biomass (r = 0.82, n = 194), with a mean production to biomass (P/B) ratio of 1.08, which differed among species. Mean biomass declined 38% over time, from 8.6 g/m2 before 1980 to 5.4 g/m2 in 2000–2020. Biomass was also higher in small streams (< 10 m wide) and in streams where smaller areas were sampled. Brown trout (Salmo trutta) streams represented a higher proportion of those with biomass > 10 g/m2 than many other species. In addition to the variables mentioned above, salmonid biomass in streams was affected by species, season, method of sampling, elevation, latitude, and migratory strategy. Expanding the list of variables would be useful for developing models to predict salmonid biomass and the conditions for an outstanding salmonid stream, defined as a stream which has a biomass estimate in the top 1% worldwide.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0060.011
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 designMeta-analysis
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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFish and FisheriesSame topicFish Ecology and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207