MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2152300362 · doi:10.1242/jeb.026203

REFILLING SEA LIONS CUT CORNERS TO MAXIMISE FISHING TIME

2008· article· en· W2152300362 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kathryn Phillips

Notice bibliographique

RevueJournal of Experimental Biology · 2008
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineEarth and Planetary Sciences
ThématiqueOcean Acidification Effects and Responses
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésForagingSea lionMarine mammalFishingFisheryPredationOptimal foraging theoryMetabolic rateEcologyBiologyOceanographyGeology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Pursuing your prey can be metabolically challenging at the best of times,but diving seals and sea lions have to do all that on a single lung full of air. Andreas Fahlman, from the Marine Mammal Research Unit at the University of British Columbia, is intrigued by the fine metabolic balance struck by foraging mammals. But when Fahlman and his colleagues began analysing the metabolic cost of individual dives during a foraging session, something didn't add up. The metabolic cost of each dive seemed to vary: while diving freely,the sea lion's first dive was the least costly and the last the most expensive. What was going on(p. 3573)?Knowing that sea lions rapidly replenish the majority of their oxygen during the first few minutes at the surface, but it takes much longer for the mammals to refill their haemoglobin oxygen stores completely, Fahlman wondered whether the sea lions were cutting corners and making subsequent dives on a partly filled tank to maximise the amount of time they spent foraging. If they were, that could account for the metabolic inconsistency; the first dive would look as if it cost less than all the subsequent dives, while the last dive(when the sea lions could finally restock completely) would appear to be the most costly.Fahlman realised that if his theory was correct, he could do away with the metabolic cost pattern if he detained the sea lions at the surface for sufficient time to completely refill their haemoglobin tanks. Then all dives should cost the same, as the sea lion would not develop an oxygen deficit during the first dive that was only repaid after the final dive. Teaming up with Caroline Svärd, David Rosen and Andrew Trites from the Marine Mammal Research Unit and David Jones from the University of British Columbia, Fahlman set about testing his theory.Working with a team of experienced animal trainers from the Vancouver Aquarium, the team prepared three sea lions to dive at a simulated foraging site. At the end of each dive, the animals swam to a respirometry dome at the surface where the team could monitor their oxygen levels as they replenished their oxygen supplies. During some of the dives, the team allowed the animals to make their own decisions when they returned to the foraging site. However,on other occasions, the team closed the door on the respirometry chamber as the animals surfaced, only allowing them to resume diving when they had completely refilled their oxygen stocks.Recording the amount of oxygen that the freely diving animals consumed each time they surfaced, Fahlman confirmed that their first dive always appeared to be the least costly and the last the most expensive. However, all of the dives of animals that were forced to sit at the surface and completely recharge their oxygen supplies appeared to cost the same. So rather than wasting valuable time at the surface completely refilling their oxygen supplies, the sea lions were choosing to dive on slightly empty tanks to maximise the amount of time spent pursuing tasty fish diners.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Expérimental (laboratoire) · Signal consensuel: Expérimental (laboratoire)
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,209
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,999

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,028
Tête enseignante GPT0,268
Écart entre enseignants0,239 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeExpérimental (laboratoire)
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2008
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJournal of Experimental BiologyMême sujetOcean Acidification Effects and ResponsesTravaux en français237 207