MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1602406998 · doi:10.22621/cfn.v119i3.145

Vision and its Relationship to Novel Behaviour in St. Lawrence River Greenland Sharks, <em>Somniosus microcephalus</em>

2005· article· en· W1602406998 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Chris Harvey-Clark, Jeffrey J. Gallant, John Batt

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Field-Naturalist · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicIchthyology and Marine Biology
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCapelinMallotusArcticBiologyFisheryCopepodPopulationPredationEcologyCrustacean

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rarely observed Greenland Sharks, Somniosus microcephalus, were recorded at shallow depths by divers employing underwater video in the St. Lawrence River, in association with a seasonal concentration of Capelin (Mallotus villosus) in May-June 2003. We recorded unique proximity-induced display motor patterns in these sharks, which have not been recorded in underwater observations of Arctic Greenland Sharks. Arctic sharks have a high incidence of blindness due to an ocular copepod parasite, Ommatokoita elongata. The absence of parasite-induced blindness in St. Lawrence Greenland Sharks, in contrast to endemic blindness in the Arctic population, may allow sharks in this region to more readily visually recognize the presence of conspecifics and potential prey. Improved visual acuity may therefore allow St. Lawrence River sharks to express a different behavioural repertoire than Arctic sharks, with resulting changes in intra- and inter-specific aggression and predatory behaviour.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score0.138

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Citations9
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Field-NaturalistSame topicIchthyology and Marine BiologyFrench-language works237,207