MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412528677 · doi:10.1093/tafafs/vnaf027

Assessing the potential for Smallmouth Bass population establishment in Grand Canyon

2025· article· en· W4412528677 on OpenAlexaff
William E. Pine, Josh Korman, Richard A. Valdez, Carl J. Walters

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions of the American Fisheries Society · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsFisheries and Oceans CanadaEcoMetrix
FundersU.S. Geological SurveyNeurosciences FoundationColorado State UniversityUtah State UniversityBureau of ReclamationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsCanyonBass (fish)FisheryEnvironmental scienceGeographyBiologyCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Objective The expansion of nonnative Smallmouth Bass Micropterus dolomieu into the Grand Canyon ecosystem downstream of Glen Canyon Dam is widely seen as a potential threat to native fishes, particularly the Humpback Chub Gila cypha, which is listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act. This concern stems from observations in the Green and upper Colorado rivers, where dam-modified habitats and reservoir introductions have allowed Smallmouth Bass to become established and impact native fish species. Our objective was to compare habitat conditions between a Smallmouth Bass population center in the Green River—where Humpback Chub are rare—and two major Humpback Chub population centers in the Colorado River in Grand Canyon, where Smallmouth Bass invasion is a conservation concern, to help assess invasion risk and inform management actions downstream of Glen Canyon Dam. Methods We developed a conceptual model of Smallmouth Bass recruitment potential emphasizing the roles of temperature, turbidity, and the timing of these conditions, based on literature for Smallmouth Bass and Largemouth Bass Micropterus nigricans. Using U.S. Geological Survey gauge station data, we summarized daily temperature and turbidity patterns near a known Smallmouth Bass population center in the middle Green River (near Jensen, Utah) and compared those with conditions in the Colorado River in Glen Canyon and Grand Canyon downstream from Glen Canyon Dam. We then used our conceptual model of Smallmouth Bass early life history, along with observed turbidity and temperature patterns, to explore how irregular recruitment could affect Smallmouth Bass population dynamics and individual growth potential using an age-structured population model and a bioenergetics model. Results Although warm reservoir releases due to low water storage in Lake Powell has made temperature regimes in Glen and Grand canyons more similar to those of the middle Green River, the Colorado River ecosystem in Grand Canyon has a very different turbidity regime from that of the middle Green River. The Colorado River in Grand Canyon becomes very turbid during late summer and fall, when tributaries experience flash floods during the North American monsoon season. These periods of high turbidity coincide with critical early life stages of Smallmouth Bass, likely limiting foraging efficiency, growth, and overwinter survival. Our population model indicates that rapidly growing and sustained Smallmouth Bass populations require successful recruitment at least once every 2 years, but empirical data suggest that these conditions occur only every 5–7 years in Grand Canyon. This would make long-term establishment of self-sustaining Smallmouth Bass populations in Grand Canyon unlikely or at least highly uncertain. Conclusions Despite the presence of nonnative predators, Humpback Chub populations in Grand Canyon have expanded during the past 10–15 years, very likely due to favorably warm river temperature. While Smallmouth Bass in Glen or Marble canyons (between Glen Canyon Dam and the Little Colorado River) may pose a downstream dispersal risk (and potentially a threat to Humpback Chub populations), high turbidity conditions downstream of the Little Colorado River reduce the likelihood of persistent local Smallmouth Bass recruitment. These results suggest that Smallmouth Bass invasion risk to Humpback Chub is not uniform across the Colorado River basin and should be evaluated in the context of the different site-specific water quality and flow regime conditions, other known risks to Humpback Chub, and Humpback Chub population size in different parts of the basin.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.241
Threshold uncertainty score0.480

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransactions of the American Fisheries SocietySame topicFish Ecology and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207