ArticleOecologia2022
Application of machine learning and acoustic predation tags to classify migration fate of Atlantic salmon smolts.
Article in Oecologia, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- The use of predator tags to explain reversal movement patterns in Atlantic salmon smolts (Salmo salar L.).Journal of fish biology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Mortality and predation of tagged fishes present a serious challenge to interpreting results of acoustic telemetry studies. There is a need for standardized methods to identify predated individuals and reduce the impacts of "predation bias" on results and conclusions. Here, we use emerging approaches in machine learning and acoustic tag technology to classify out-migrating Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) smolts into different fate categories. We compared three methods of fate classification: predation tag pH sensors and detection data, unsupervised k-means clustering, and supervised random forest combined with tag pH sensor data. Random forest models increased predation estimates by 9-32% compared to relying solely on pH sensor data, while clustering reduced estimates by 3.5-30%. The greatest changes in fate class estimates were seen in years with large class imbalance (one or more fate classes underrepresented compared to the others) or low model accuracy. Both supervised and unsupervised approaches were able to classify smolt fate; however, in-sample model accuracy improved when using tag sensor data to train models, emphasizing the value of incorporating such sensors when studying small fish. Sensor data may not be sufficient to identify predation in isolation due to Type I and Type II error in predation sensor triggering. Combining sensor data with machine learning approaches should be standard practice to more accurately classify fate of tagged fish.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.