DIETS OF FIN, SEI, AND SPERM WHALES IN BRITISH COLUMBIA: AN ANALYSIS OF COMMERCIAL WHALING RECORDS, 1963–1967
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A bstract Diets of fin ( Balaenoptera physalus ), sei ( Balaenoptera borealis ), and sperm whales ( Physeter macrocephalus ) were estimated from the stomach contents of individuals killed along the British Columbia coast from 1963 to 1967. The dominant prey types of fin whales were euphausiids, with minor contributions from copepods and fish. Sei whale stomachs contained primarily copepods in three years, whereas euphausiids or a variety of fish dominated the diet in the other two years. Sperm whales consumed primarily North Pacific giant squid ( Moroteuthis robusta ), but secondary prey differed between males and females. Female sperm whales frequently consumed ragfish ( Icosteus spp.) and other fish, whereas the male diet also contained rockfish ( Sebastes spp.). The high abundance of euphausiids along the British Columbia coast likely contributed to the presence of a summer resident population of fin whales. The high abundance of large copepods farther north probably influenced the migration of sei whales through the offshore waters of British Columbia. Sperm whale stomach contents differed by sex reflecting location and possibly breeding behaviors.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".