Fraser River sockeye salmon: data synthesis and cumulative impacts

Table 4.4-2. Model specifications for the 1969-2004 (brood years) model set. This table shows the variablesincluded in each of the 8 models tested (i.e., M1 to M8) within this model set. Table 4.4-1 explains whichspecific data sets were used for each of these variables. “Rank of model” reflects the AIC c score showinglevel of support (#1 ranked model had the highest level of support and lowest AIC c score).Region Variable M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 M6 M7 M8QCS Salinity X X X XQCS Discharge X X XQCS Wind X XSoG Temperature X X XSoG Salinity X X X XSoG Discharge X X XRank of model 3 4 5 2 7 8 6 1For 1980-2004 (Table 4.4-3), the three models with the lowest AICc scores were M4 (QCS SST,SSS and discharge), M5 (QCS SST and SSS), and M2 (QCS SST, SSS, discharge, and wind)(Table A4.3-16). Together they indicate that the QCS models have greater explanatory valuethan SoG models for Fraser River sockeye salmon productivity during 1980-2004. Thisconclusion is supported further by the fact that the models with the next two lowest AICc scoresare M7 (QCS SSS) and M9 (QCS SST). This finding is an important new result because it isalters the conclusion of Peterman et al. (2010) based on new data and analyses that were notavailable at the PSC workshop.Table 4.4-3. Model specifications for the 1980-2004 (brood years) model set. This table shows the variablesincluded in each of the 10 models tested (i.e. M1 to M10) within this model set. Table 4.4-1 explains whichspecific data sets were used for each of these variables. “Rank of model” reflects the AIC c score showinglevel of support (#1 ranked model had the highest level of support and lowest AIC c score).Region Variable M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 M6 M7 M8 M9 M10QCS Temperature X X X X XQCS Salinity X X X X XQCS Discharge X X XQCS Wind X XSoG Temperature X X X XSoG Salinity X X X XSoG Discharge X XRank of model 6 3 10 1 2 8 4 9 5 7Within both of the model sets discussed above (i.e. 1969-2004 and 1980-2004), and across allmodels for both QCS and SoG, temperature demonstrated a negative or inverse relationship withthe productivity of Fraser River sockeye salmon. Salinity also had a consistent relationshipacross all models within both of the model sets discussed above; however, the direction of therelationship is in the opposite direction for the two regions, positive for QCS, and negative for67