Site fidelity during spawning period of a population of stocked fish
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Understanding site fidelity of a species provides insights into preferences and locations of key habitats associated with spawning, foraging, and other life-history events. For compromised species with high spawning site fidelity and where habitat quality impedes recruitment, insights into their behavioural variability may be useful for management. Here, we examined the relative intra-population variation in site fidelity for lake trout ( Salvelinus namaycush) from eastern Lake Ontario during the spawning period, a population largely composed of stocked fish. Using a 5-year dataset, we created an acoustic telemetry-specific site fidelity index. All tagged fish ( n = 72) returned to the general spawning area every year, but individuals showed varying fidelity to specific sites. Low fidelity was observed for 51.4% of individuals, compared to 27.8% and 20.8% showing medium and high, respectively. All females had low or medium fidelity compared to half of the males, demonstrating gender-based differences in fidelity. This study provides quantitative evidence that lake trout can display strong general spawning fidelity at larger (i.e., ecosystem) scales but moderate levels of behavioural variability and potential plasticity on smaller, regional scales (i.e., for specific sites) in freshwater ecosystems.
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".