MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7066592954

Interspecific competition among juvenile salmonids: social behaviour and HORMONE LEVELS OF ATLANTIC SALMON AND TWO NON-NATIVE TROUT SPECIES

2011· article· en· W7066592954 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueScholarship@Western (Western University) · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicProtist diversity and phylogeny
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterspecific competitionRainbow troutCompetition (biology)JuvenileTroutSalmonidae
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Competition with ecologically similar non-native salmonids may hinder efforts to restore Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) in Lake Ontario. I examined the competitive effects of juvenile brown trout (S. truttci) and rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss), two non-native competitors, on aggression, dominance, growth, and hormone concentrations of three candidate strains of juvenile Atlantic salmon selected for réintroduction into Lake Ontario. Interspecific competition in semi-natural streams reduced aggression, dominance, and growth of Atlantic salmon, coincident with increasing concentrations of cortisol, a hormone that functions in part in the stress response. An aggression-associated hormone, 11-ketotestosterone, was largely unaffected. Interestingly, the most ecologically similar competitor, rainbow trout, had less impact on Atlantic salmon behaviour and growth, relative to brown trout. Atlantic salmon from Lac Saint-Jean were least affected, implicating genetic differences among strains and specific management recommendations. This study highlights the necessity of competition experiments to understand how competition may influence restoration of extirpated populations.

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)0.000
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 score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score0.124

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScholarship@Western (Western University)Same topicProtist diversity and phylogenyFrench-language works237,207