An examination of the ecology of the cisco (Coregonus artedii) in Ontario lakes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research explores two aspects of cisco ecology: life history variation and behavioral variation. The life history investigation encompasses a spatial comparison of the life histories exhibited by populations from across Ontario; an assessment of changes made in life history exhibited by several populations over several decades; and an examination of the association between variation in life history and variation in the character of the higher trophic levels that are supported by cisco. Results indicate that there is a broad range in maximum attainable size, growth, condition and size at maturity, and these characteristics show strong positive correlations with one another. These traits had weak relationships with environmental measures of primary productivity (total dissolved solids), however the structure of the predator community (specifically the presence of walleye) was linked with larger body sizes and associated traits. Results from a detailed examination of the establishment of 3 new, independent and self-sustaining populations from the introduction of a single stock into three separate water-bodies in 1948, suggest that the life history strategy of a population of cisco can shift over short time scales (25 years or less). These life history shifts appear to be the result of plastic changes in phenotype, and are precipitated by significant changes in the predator community. Shifts in life history strategies can actually prevent the predator population from regaining the position once held in the community. The impact of predation on cisco behaviour was also examined. Results suggest that the presence of a visual predator increases the size of schools that cisco form during the day and forces those schools deeper into the water column, into less favorable environments. However, the presence of a visual predator does not impact the timing of school dissociation at the end of the day or the nighttime behavior itself. These findings are put into a larger context that emphasizes the importance of environmental characteristics and community characteristics in shaping the observed life history and behaviour of cisco 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 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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".