Cetacean Strandings in the Canadian Maritime Provinces, 1990-2008
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Organized cetacean stranding networks function to respond quickly and efficiently to strandings, to coordinate live releases, to gather and analyze data, and to educate the public. Stranding networks in the three Canadian Maritime provinces (New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, and Prince Edward Island) recently cooperated to form the Marine Animal Response Network. The resulting collaborative database provides an opportunity to assess patterns of cetacean strandings encompassing 19 years (1990-2008 inclusive) from across the region. During this period, a total of 640 stranding events involving 19 species and 881 individuals of both sexes and varying age groups were reported. Stranding events primarily involved single animals, although several mass strandings were recorded, the largest involving 60 Long-finned Pilot Whales (Globicephala melas). The number of strandings was found to vary substantially over time and among the three provinces. In part, this is likely a reflection of differences in local network effort among regions. Most animals were found dead ashore. Entanglement in fishing gear occurred in over 10% of the incidents. Relatively more mysticetes were found dead ashore or at sea and entangled in fishing gear than expected by chance, while more odontocetes were found stranded alive than expected. Harbour Porpoises (Phocoena phocoena) appear to be especially vulnerable to entanglement in fishing gear. Necropsies, performed on a subsample of the stranded animals, suggest that Harbour Porpoises die significantly more often from disease than mishap, while Long-finned Pilot Whales and Atlantic White-sided Dolphins (Lagenorhynchus acutus) suffer equally from mishap and disease. Refloating was attempted for 23% of animals, with an apparent success rate of 83%, although there are no data on long-term survival. Neither sex nor age of the refloated animals was found to be an indicator of subsequent short-term survival.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".