SAR.DOY.TEMP
  • About
  • SAR survival and T:B ratio
  • Model Parameters
  • Methods & References
  • Release Notes
Image of SAR.DOY.TEMP welcome banner

Snake River spring/summer Chinook Salmon and Steelhead smolts migrate downstream through parts of the hydrosystem of the Columbia River System (Pacific Northwest) towards the ocean. The US Army Corps of Engineers runs the Juvenile Fish Transportation Program to help mitigate decreases in smolt-to-adult-return (SAR) survival.

One way to assess the effectiveness of the transportation program is through a survival ratio of fish that were transported (T) through the hydrosystem vs. bypassed and returned to the river (B). Thus, a survival ratio of:

  • T:B = 1 would indicate a neutral effect of juvenile transportation on SAR survival,
  • T:B > 1 would indicate a benefit of juvenile transportation on SAR survival, and
  • T:B < 1 would represent a negative effect of juvenile transportation on SAR survival.

Several studies find outmigration timing of smolts to be an important covariate of SAR survival (incl. Scheuerell et al. 2009, Gosselin et al. 2018, Chasco et al. 2021, Gosselin et al. 2021). River temperature is highly correlated with day-of-year during this time of year, and thus is also an important covariate of SAR survival.

Day-of-year (DOY) can represent processes such as phenological changes, smolt development, readiness to enter the marine environment, match/mismatch with prey, and spatial/temporal co-location of predators. River temperature can be considered more biologically relevant than DOY because of its association with metabolism, growth, and stress under suboptimal or critical temperatures.

This Shiny app thus includes both DOY and river temperature as covariates for examining seasonal patterns of SAR survival.

Model Parameter Estimates

See Methods for more information on parameters and data.

  • Wild Spring/Summer Chinook Salmon
  • Hatchery Spring/Summer Chinook Salmon
  • Wild Steelhead
  • Hatchery Steelhead
Table 1. Parameter estimates of the LGR-LGR smolt-to-adult return model for wild spring/summer Chinook Salmon including the covariates day-of-year (d) at time of smolt passage at LGR and the transportation index (t).
Parameter Associated Covariate Estimate Est.Error Q2.5 Q97.5
α1 — -5.68 0.21 -6.09 -5.27
β1 di -0.29 0.05 -0.39 -0.18
β2 di2 0.02 0.03 -0.05 0.09
β3 ti 0.50 0.11 0.28 0.71
β4 di × ti 0.42 0.04 0.35 0.50
β5 di2 × ti -0.05 0.03 -0.11 0.01

Table 2. Parameter estimates of the LGR-LGR smolt-to-adult return model for wild spring/summer Chinook Salmon including the covariates river temperature (θ; °C) at time of smolt passage at LGR and the transportation index (t).
Parameter Associated Covariate Estimate Est.Error Q2.5 Q97.5
α2 — -5.58 0.18 -5.94 -5.22
β6 θi -0.33 0.06 -0.45 -0.22
β7 θi2 -0.04 0.03 -0.09 0.02
β8 ti 0.44 0.10 0.24 0.64
β9 θi × ti 0.42 0.04 0.34 0.49
β10 θi2 × ti 0.00 0.02 -0.04 0.05
Table 3. Parameter estimates of the LGR-LGR smolt-to-adult return model for hatchery spring/summer Chinook Salmon including the covariates day-of-year (d) at time of smolt passage at LGR and the transportation index (t).
Parameter Associated Covariate Estimate Est.Error Q2.5 Q97.5
α1 — -6.16 0.21 -6.58 -5.75
β1 di -0.02 0.05 -0.11 0.07
β2 di2 0.01 0.02 -0.04 0.05
β3 ti 0.76 0.12 0.52 0.99
β4 di × ti 0.47 0.03 0.42 0.52
β5 di2 × ti -0.17 0.02 -0.20 -0.13

Table 4. Parameter estimates of the LGR-LGR smolt-to-adult return model for hatchery spring/summer Chinook Salmon including the covariates river temperature (θ; °C) at time of smolt passage at LGR and the transportation index (t).
Parameter Associated Covariate Estimate Est.Error Q2.5 Q97.5
α2 — -6.13 0.20 -6.54 -5.73
β6 θi -0.03 0.06 -0.14 0.08
β7 θi2 -0.03 0.02 -0.07 0.01
β8 ti 0.73 0.11 0.52 0.94
β9 θi × ti 0.43 0.03 0.37 0.49
β10 θi2 × ti -0.08 0.02 -0.12 -0.05
Table 5. Parameter estimates of the LGR-LGR smolt-to-adult return model for wild Steelhead including the covariates day-of-year (d) at time of smolt passage at LGR and the transportation index (t).
Parameter Associated Covariate Estimate Est.Error Q2.5 Q97.5
α1 — -6.07 0.21 -6.49 -5.66
β1 di -0.50 0.10 -0.71 -0.30
β2 di2 -0.13 0.05 -0.23 -0.03
β3 ti 1.27 0.13 1.02 1.55
β4 di × ti 0.19 0.04 0.12 0.27
β5 di2 × ti -0.01 0.03 -0.07 0.04

Table 6. Parameter estimates of the LGR-LGR smolt-to-adult return model for wild Steelhead including the covariates river temperature (θ; °C) at time of smolt passage at LGR and the transportation index (t).
Parameter Associated Covariate Estimate Est.Error Q2.5 Q97.5
α2 — -6.00 0.19 -6.38 -5.63
β6 θi -0.48 0.09 -0.66 -0.30
β7 θi2 -0.15 0.05 -0.26 -0.05
β8 ti 1.27 0.13 1.02 1.53
β9 θi × ti 0.16 0.05 0.06 0.26
β10 θi2 × ti -0.02 0.03 -0.08 0.04
Table 7. Parameter estimates of the LGR-LGR smolt-to-adult return model for hatchery Steelhead including the covariates day-of-year (d) at time of smolt passage at LGR and the transportation index (t).
Parameter Associated Covariate Estimate Est.Error Q2.5 Q97.5
α1 — -6.23 0.19 -6.60 -5.84
β1 di -0.60 0.08 -0.76 -0.45
β2 di2 -0.20 0.04 -0.29 -0.12
β3 ti 0.80 0.13 0.55 1.07
β4 di × ti 0.47 0.04 0.38 0.56
β5 di2 × ti -0.03 0.03 -0.10 0.03

Table 8. Parameter estimates of the LGR-LGR smolt-to-adult return model for hatchery Steelhead including the covariates river temperature (θ; °C) at time of smolt passage at LGR and the transportation index (t).
Parameter Associated Covariate Estimate Est.Error Q2.5 Q97.5
α2 — -6.16 0.17 -6.50 -5.84
β6 θi -0.60 0.08 -0.75 -0.45
β7 θi2 -0.25 0.05 -0.35 -0.15
β8 ti 0.74 0.13 0.50 1.00
β9 θi × ti 0.47 0.05 0.38 0.57
β10 θi2 × ti 0.04 0.04 -0.03 0.12
Methods
Study fish

The Snake River spring/summer Chinook Salmon and Steelhead (Pacific Northwest , USA) used in this analysis were tagged with passive integrated transponder (PIT) tags (PTAGIS, Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission; www.ptagis.org). All of these fishes had a juvenile PIT tag detection time at Lower Granite Dam within day-of-year 80–160. We included wild and hatchery rearing types, and transported and in-river passage types (see DART transportation filter for more details). Adult returns through age 4-ocean (or 6 years total) are included, but jacks and mini-jacks are excluded. The PIT tag data set used begins in 1993 and is updated annually.

Covariates

The covariates are DOY at time of passage at Lower Granite Dam (LGR) and river temperature at time of LGR passage. The river temperature data is the WQM data (US Army Corps of Engineers, accessed at Columbia River DART River Environment Graphics & Text), calculated as a 7-day right-aligned rolling mean. The DOY and river temperature covariate data were each standardized to a mean of 0 and 1 SD for modeling.

Model

A Bayesian binomial logistic model was used to model the smolt-to-adult (SAR) survival with day-of-year (\(p_{d,i}\); Eq. 1) or with river temperature (\(p_{\theta,i}\); Eq. 2):

\begin{align} logit(p_{d,i}) = \alpha_1 + \beta_1d_i + \beta_2d_i^2 + \beta_3t_i + \beta_4d_i & \times t_i + \beta_5d_i^2 \times t_i + \epsilon_{\alpha,1} + \epsilon_{\beta_1,1} + \epsilon_{\beta_2,1} + \epsilon_{\beta_3,1} \tag{1} \\ \epsilon_{\alpha,1} \sim N&(0, \sigma_{\alpha,1}) \nonumber \\ \epsilon_{\beta_1,1} \sim N&(0, \sigma_{\beta_1,1}) \nonumber \\ \epsilon_{\beta_2,1} \sim N&(0, \sigma_{\beta_2,1}) \nonumber \\ \epsilon_{\beta_3,1} \sim N&(0, \sigma_{\beta_3,1}) \nonumber \end{align}

where \(\alpha_1\) is the intercept, the \(\beta\) parameters are the slopes associated with day-of-year as a main effect (\(d\)) and quadratic effect (\(d^2\)), a transportation index (\(t\); presence/absence of transportation represented by 1/0), and their interaction effects for each individual \(i\). The random effects (\(\epsilon_{\alpha,1}\), \(\epsilon_{\beta_1,1}\), \(\epsilon_{\beta_2,1}\), \(\epsilon_{\beta_3,1}\)) are associated with \(\alpha_1\), \(\beta_1\), \(\beta_2\), and \(\beta_3\), respectively.

\begin{align} logit(p_{\theta,i}) = \alpha_2 + \beta_6\theta_i + \beta_7\theta_i^2 + \beta_8t_i + \beta_9\theta_i & \times t_i + \beta_{10}\theta_i^2 \times t_i + \epsilon_{\alpha,2} + \epsilon_{\beta_1,2} + \epsilon_{\beta_2,2} + \epsilon_{\beta_3,2} \tag{2} \\ \epsilon_{\alpha,2} \sim N&(0, \sigma_{\alpha,2}) \nonumber \\ \epsilon_{\beta_1,2} \sim N&(0, \sigma_{\beta_1,2}) \nonumber \\ \epsilon_{\beta_2,2} \sim N&(0, \sigma_{\beta_2,2}) \nonumber \\ \epsilon_{\beta_3,2} \sim N&(0, \sigma_{\beta_3,2}) \nonumber \end{align}

where the parameters are analogous to those in Eq. 1, except that day-of-year (\(d\)) is replaced by river temperature (\(\theta\)). A separate model was determined for each species (spring/summer Chinook Salmon or Steelhead) and rearing type (wild or hatchery) combination.

For outmigration years with incomplete adult returns (i.e., outmigration years without adults through age 4-ocean [or 6 years total]), out-of-sample predictions were determined by taking 3,000 random draws from the posteriors that included random effects from all historical years analyzed.

We applied the brm function from the brms R package (Version 2.23.0; Bürkner 2017). We simulated 2,000 draws for each of the three randomly initiated chains, and discarded the first 1,000 draws, resulting in a total of 3,000 draws saved. We assess convergence by the traceplots, Gelman-Ruben statistic of \(\hat{R}\) < 1.05, and absence of any divergent transitions.

DART SAR

For comparison, annual estimates from DART PIT Tag Columbia Basin ESU & DPS Smolt-to-Adult Return (SAR) Survival are added to the figures.

References
  1. Bürkner, PC. 2017. brms: An R package for Bayesian multilevel models using Stan. Journal of statistical software, 80(1), 1-28. doi: 10.18637/jss.v080.i01
  2. Chasco, B, Burke, B, Crozier, L, and Zabel, L. 2021. Differential impacts of freshwater and marine covariates on wild and hatchery Chinook salmon marine survival. Plos One 16(2):e0246659. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0246659
  3. Fay, C, Rochette, S, Guyader, V, and Girard, C. (2021). Engineering Production-Grade Shiny Apps. Chapman and Hall/CRC. Accessed via online version: https://engineering-shiny.org/index.html
  4. Gosselin, JL, Zabel, RW, Anderson, JJ, Faulkner, JR, Baptista, AM, and Sandford, BP. 2018. Conservation planning for freshwater–marine carryover effects on Chinook salmon survival. Ecology and Evolution, 8(1), 319-332. doi: 10.1002/ece3.3663
  5. Gosselin, JL, Buhle, ER, Van Holmes, C. , Beer, WN, Iltis, S, and Anderson, JJ. 2021. The role of carryover effects in conservation of wild Pacific salmon migrating regulated rivers. Ecosphere 12(7):e03618. doi: 10.1002/ecs2.3618
  6. Scheuerell, MD, Zabel, RW, and Sandford, BP. 2009. Relating juvenile migration timing and survival to adulthood in two species of threatened Pacific salmon (Oncorhynchus spp.). Journal of Applied Ecology, 46(5), 983-990. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2009.01693.x
Release Notes
  • v1.0.0 — 2026-03-06: Initial version release for public viewing.
  • BetaVersion.Sept25 — 2025-09-19: Updates include:
    • Name change from HydroSurvDOYTEMP to SAR.DOY.TEMP; reflected in GitHub repo rename.
    • Accessibility improvements (welcome modal, font sizes) and better screen-reader support.
    • Removed double reactivity causing plot delays; improved Run button behavior.
  • BetaVersion.Mar23 — 2023-03-31: Initial release for beta testing

Columbia Basin Research • School of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences • College of the Environment • University of Washington • web@cbr.washington.edu

Welcome