Estuarine Growth of Juvenile Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) as Inferred from Otolith Microstructure
Abstract
The growth of juvenile chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) in the Sixes River Estuary, Oregon, was inferred from otolith microstructure. Otolith increments appeared to be formed daily, on average, and a transition between those produced during freshwater residence and estuary residence was apparent. Otolith microstructure was also examined with respect to time series of water temperature, population density, and benthic standing crop data. While the results supported the hypothesis of food-limited growth, elevated water temperatures in midsummer may have decreased food conversion efficiencies, thus also contributing to an observed growth rate decline. It was also found that from counts of otolith increments formed during freshwater life, fish that hatched relatively late tended to spend less time in freshwater before moving downstream to the estuary.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Growth varies between different types of nursery habitats for juvenile fish.
“We specifically focus on growth, which is a common metric for juvenile fish habitat quality [20–23], and varies between different types of nursery habitats for juvenile fish [24–27].”
From Estimating Common Growth Patterns in Juvenile Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) from Diverse Genetic Stocks and a Large Spatial Extent (2016) · cites this paper as [25]
Distinct changes in growth have been used to describe habitat changes in juvenile Chinook salmon.
“Furthermore, distinct changes in growth have been used to describe habitat changes in juvenile Chinook salmon [25, 28].”
From Estimating Common Growth Patterns in Juvenile Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) from Diverse Genetic Stocks and a Large Spatial Extent (2016) · cites this paper as [25]
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Magnusson, A., & Hilborn, R. (2003) · Estuaries · doi:10.1007/bf02803366 · Cited by 129 · see citing works
Goertler, P. A. L., Scheuerell, M. D., Simenstad, C. A., & Bottom, D. L. (2016) · PLOS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0162121 · Cited by 10 · see citing works
Self-citationA salmon ecosystem conceptual foundation for estuary restoration
Bottom, D. L., Jones, K. K., Borde, A. B., Krueger, K. L., Johnson, G. E., Castro, J. M., & Thom, R. M. (2025) · Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · doi:10.1139/cjfas-2025-0139 · Cited by 3 · see citing works
Self-citation
- Authors
- Neilson, J. D., Geen, G. H., & Bottom, D.
- ORCID
- Bottom, Daniel
- Venue
- Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences
- Publisher
- Canadian Science Publishing
- Published
- 1985-05-01
- Volume
- 42
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 899-908
- ISSN
- 0706-652X (ISSN-L)
- 1205-7533
- OpenAlex
- W2071714485
- Cited by
- 83
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 2
- FWCI
- 4.20
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- California Department of Fish and Wildlife
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Marine and fisheries research
- Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Aquatic Science › Fish Biology and Ecology Studies
- Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Fish Ecology and Management Studies
- Keywords
- Oncorhynchus tshawytscha, juvenile salmon growth, otolith microstructure, food conversion efficiency, water temperature effects, hatching time, population density
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review