Lake whitefish, Lake Opeongo designatable units RPA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Lake Opeongo large-bodied and small-bodied designatable units (DUs) of Lake Whitefish (Coregonus clupeaformis) were assessed as Threatened by COSEWIC (Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada) as a unique species pair found only in Lake Opeongo, Algonquin Provincial Park, Ontario (Figure 1). The large-bodied and small-bodied DUs have likely evolved to use different ecological niches in the lake. Lake Opeongo is the only known lake where a small-bodied DU of Lake Whitefish persists despite the presence of Cisco (Coregonus artedi; introduced in 1948). The greatest threat to both DUs is the introduction of new invasive species that could disrupt the ecological processes that maintain divergence in the species pair. Invasive zooplankton and fishes occur near Lake Opeongo and could be introduced by human-mediated mechanisms. Other threats include existing introduced species, climate change, and possibly human disturbances. The impact of these threats is not well known; however, in other lakes, introduced species are implicated in the loss of other Lake Whitefish species pairs. Habitat features required for the adult life stage of both DUs include areas of deep, cold water (not exceeding 20°C) in the hypolimnion and nearshore areas over hard substrates < 10 m in depth for spawning activities; eggs, in general, require hard substrates and cold overwinter temperatures with extensive ice cover for proper development; larvae require warming, productive surface waters initially for feeding and growth. Lake Opeongo has a total area of 5,860 ha. The minimum area required to support the large-bodied DU was determined to be ~4,900 ha and ~1,200 ha for the small-bodied DU, suggesting Lake Opeongo has sufficient habitat to support both DUs. Two population modelling scenarios were considered: one where the two DUs are reproductively isolated, and one where a single population is characterized by two alternative life-history strategies. When the two DUs are reproductively isolated, the impact of harm was sensitive to a DU’s population trajectory. The large-bodied DU is most sensitive to the juvenile stage when experiencing population growth, and is most sensitive to the adult stage when the population is stable or declining. The small-bodied DU is similarly sensitive across life stages under most population growth scenarios, but is less sensitive for the adult life stage when experiencing population growth. The minimum viable population (MVP) size was estimated as ~1,400 to ~2,300 adult females for the large-bodied DU, and ~4,100 to ~8,700 adult females for the small-bodied DU depending on catastrophe rate. Several knowledge gaps exist around the biological nature of the DUs. Key knowledge gaps also exist around the population size and trajectory, particularly for the small-bodied DU, and the impacts of existing and future invasive species.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.002 |
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".