ArticlePloS one2025
Validating Atlantic salmon (Salmo Salar) scale reading by genetic parent assignment and PIT-tagging.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Understanding changes in abundance and survival in Atlantic salmon populations requires knowledge of growth rates and age. Salmon are typically aged through scale reading, but such estimates are rarely validated against age-verified fish from the wild. Here, we present a unique dataset of scales from 254 PIT-tagged Atlantic salmon with known sea-age. In addition, the freshwater age is known for 81 of these fish, through genetic parent-offspring identification. This dataset was used to estimate precision and bias in age readings and back-calculated length, as estimated by three independent experienced salmon scale readers. Overall, readers had an accuracy of 97.1% for sea-age and 71.7% for freshwater-age. For sea-age, scale reading was less accurate for salmon that had spent 2 or more years at sea than for salmon that had spent 1 year at sea. Freshwater age did however not affect scale reading accuracy. None of the scale readers erroneously misclassified freshwater- or sea-age with more than one year, and there was no significant pattern of misclassified ages to be under- or overestimate by the scale readers. Back-calculated smolt length was significantly different to length when measured as a smolt prior to seaward migration: it was shorter than the measured body-length for small smolts and longer for large smolts. This unique dataset, including the age-validated images of all scales, is now made openly available providing an important resource for training and testing salmon scale readers globally.
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.