MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1550390838 · doi:10.25148/etd.fi08081532

Phylogenetic and Ecological Significance in the Evolution of Cetacean Tonal Sounds

2007· dissertation· en· W1550390838 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Laura J. May‐Collado

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSmithsonian Tropical Research InstituteKillam TrustsAmerican Society of MammalogistsAnimal Behavior SocietyFlorida International University
KeywordsSocialitySound (geography)BioacousticsHuman echolocationCetaceaBiologyAdaptation (eye)Phylogenetic treePredationCommunicationEvolutionary biologyEcologyAcousticsPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cetaceans are aquatic mammals that rely primarily on sound for most daily tasks. A compendium of sounds is emitted for orientation, prey detection, and predator avoidance, and to communicate. Communicative sounds are among the most studied Cetacean signals, particularly those referred to as tonal sounds. Because tonal sounds have been studied especially well in social dolphins, it has been assumed these sounds evolved as a social adaptation. However, whistles have been reported in ‘solitary’ species and have been secondarily lost three times in social lineages. Clearly, therefore, it is necessary to examine closely the association, if any, between whistles and sociality instead of merely assuming it. Several hypotheses have been proposed to explain the evolutionary history of Cetacean tonal sounds. The main goal of this dissertation is to cast light on the evolutionary history of tonal sounds by testing these hypotheses by combining comparative phylogenetic and field methods. This dissertation provides the first species-level phylogeny of Cetacea and phylogenetic tests of evolutionary hypotheses of cetacean communicative signals. Tonal sounds evolution is complex in that has likely been shaped by a combination of factors that may influence different aspects of their acoustical structure. At the inter-specific level, these results suggest that only tonal sound minimum frequency is constrained by body size. Group size also influences tonal sound minimum frequency. Species that live in large groups tend to produce higher frequency tonal sounds. The evolutionary history of tonal sounds and sociality may be intertwined, but in a complex manner rejecting simplistic views such as the hypothesis that tonal sounds evolved ‘for’ social communication in dolphins. Levels of social and tonal sound complexity nevertheless correlate indicating the importance of tonal sounds in social communication. At the intraspecific level, tonal sound variation in frequency and temporal parameters may be product of genetic isolation and local levels of underwater noise. This dissertation provides one of the first insights into the evolution of Cetacean tonal sounds in a phylogenetic context, and points out key species where future studies would be valuable to enrich our understanding of other factors also playing a role in tonal sound evolution.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.253 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMarine animal studies overview→French-language works237,207→