Phenotypic divergence between hatchery pink and coho salmon and their wild counterparts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Interbreeding between hatchery-reared and wild salmon raises concerns that hatchery fish may increase the frequency of maladapted alleles in wild populations, yet divergence between hatchery populations and their original sources remains poorly understood. We explored phenotypic divergence in reproductive traits between hatchery and source populations of pink ( Oncorhynchus gorbuscha) and coho salmon ( Oncorhynchus kisutch) in Southeast Alaska, hypothesizing that relaxed selection in the hatchery would result in males with smaller snouts and humps and females with larger gonadosomatic indices and smaller, less nutrient-dense eggs. Findings partly confirmed these expectations. Our hypotheses were supported in coho salmon females and odd-year pink salmon males, but results from coho salmon males opposed our hypotheses and we observed no phenotypic divergence in even-year pink salmon, possibly due to high gene flow between hatchery and wild populations. These mixed results indicate significant yet variable phenotypic differences between hatchery and wild salmon in key reproductive traits. Our study provides a rare comparison of how hatchery rearing affects reproductive traits between species with different life histories in Southeast Alaska.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".