MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Sex differences in grey seal diet reflect seasonal variation in foraging behaviour and reproductive expenditure: evidence from quantitative fatty acid signature analysis

2007· article· en· W1972216609 on OpenAlexafffund
Carrie A. Beck, Sara J. Iverson, W. Don Bowen, Wade Blanchard

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Animal Ecology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsBedford Institute of OceanographyFisheries and Oceans CanadaDalhousie University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsForagingBiologyVariation (astronomy)ZoologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

1. Intraspecific variation in diet can be an important component of a species niche breadth. We tested the hypothesis that sex differences in seasonal foraging behaviour and energy storage of sexually size dimorphic grey seals Halichoerus grypus (Fabrisius 1971) are reflected in differences in the diet and niche breadth. Diet composition was estimated for 496 adult (226 males, 270 females) and 91 juvenile (46 males/45 females; all 6 months old) grey seals sampled between 1993 and 2000 using quantitative fatty acid signature analysis. Niche breadth and overlap were estimated using the Shannon-Weaver diversity index (H') and the Morisita-Horn index (C(H)), respectively. 2. Sand lance Ammodytes dubius (Reinhardt 1837) and redfish Sebastes sp. (Cuvier 1829) accounted for a high proportion of the diet in both sexes and age groups. However, the diets of adult males were significantly more diverse across all seasons (H': males 0.36 +/- 0.007 vs. females 0.28 +/- 0.007) and less energy dense in spring (male 5.3 +/- 0.07 kJ g(-1) vs. females 5.6 +/- 0.09 kJ g(-1)) than those of adult females. 3. Season and sex explained most of the observed variation in adult diets, but there were significant sex-season interactions. These differences were most evident during the post-breeding (spring) foraging period when energy acquisition is important to female recovery of nutrient stores needed to support pregnancy. Females selected fewer and higher quality prey species in spring than males. 4. There were no sex differences in the diets of juvenile grey seals. Although many of the species overlapped with those eaten by adults, juvenile niche breadth (H': 0.41 +/- 0.014, n = 91) was significantly broader than that of adults (H': 0.30 +/- 0.011, n = 115). Juvenile diets were also of lower energy density (5.3 +/- 0.04 kJ g(-1)) than those of adults (5.6 +/- 0.09 kJ g(-1)), suggesting less selectivity in these young and relatively naïve predators. 5. Sex-specific seasonal changes in diet correspond to seasonal changes in diving behaviour and rate of body energy accumulation of adult males and females. Sex-specific reproductive requirements appear to be a primary factor generating the intraspecific variation in the seasonal foraging ecology of this large marine carnivore. However, sex differences in the breadth and energy content of diets also suggest the influence of body-size dimorphism as a factor shaping the diet of this species.

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)0.001
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Citations211
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Animal EcologySame topicMarine animal studies overviewFrench-language works237,207