MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1972913773 · doi:10.1890/02-4105

QUANTITATIVE FATTY ACID SIGNATURE ANALYSIS: A NEW METHOD OF ESTIMATING PREDATOR DIETS

2004· article· en· W1972913773 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sara J. Iverson, Chris Field, W. Don Bowen, Wade Blanchard

Bibliographic record

VenueEcological Monographs · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsBedford Institute of OceanographyFisheries and Oceans CanadaDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyPredationCapelinFatty acidHerringPredatorMinkPhocaEcologyZoologyFisheryBiochemistryFish <Actinopterygii>

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Accurate estimates of the diets of predators are required in many areas of ecology, but for many species current methods are imprecise, limited to the last meal, and often biased. The diversity of fatty acids and their patterns in organisms, coupled with the narrow limitations on their biosynthesis, properties of digestion in monogastric animals, and the prevalence of large storage reservoirs of lipid in many predators, led us to propose the use of quantitative fatty acid signature analysis (QFASA) to study predator diets. We present a statistical model that provides quantitative estimates of the proportions of prey species in the diets of individual predators using fatty acid signatures. We conducted simulation studies using a database of 28 prey species ( n = 954 individuals) from the Scotian Shelf off eastern Canada to investigate properties of the model and to evaluate the reliability with which prey could be distinguished in the model. We then conducted experiments on grey seals ( Halichoerus grypus , n = 25) and harp seals ( Phoca groenlandica , n = 5) to assess quantitative characteristics of fatty acid deposition and to develop calibration coefficients for individual fatty acids to account for predator lipid metabolism. We then tested the model and calibration coefficients by estimating the diets of experimentally fed captive grey seals ( n = 6, switched from herring to a mackerel/capelin diet) and mink kits ( Mustela vison , n = 46, switched from milk to one of three oil‐supplemented diets). The diets of all experimentally fed animals were generally well estimated using QFASA and were consistent with qualitative and quantitative expectations, provided that appropriate calibration coefficients were used. In a final case, we compared video data of foraging by individual free‐ ranging harbor seals ( Phoca vitulina , n = 23) fitted with Crittercams and QFASA estimates of the diet of those same seals using a complex ecosystem‐wide prey database. Among the 28 prey species in the database, QFASA estimated sandlance to be the dominant prey species in the diet of all seals (averaging 62% of diet), followed primarily by flounders, but also capelin and minor amounts of other species, although there was also considerable individual variability among seals. These estimates were consistent with video data showing sandlance to be the predominant prey, followed by flatfish. We conclude that QFASA provides estimates of diets for individuals at time scales that are relevant to the ecological processes affecting survival, and can be used to study diet variability within individuals over time, which will provide important opportunities rarely possible with other indirect methods. We propose that the QFASA model we have set forth will be applicable to a wide range of predators and ecosystems.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations734
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcological MonographsSame topicMarine animal studies overviewFrench-language works237,207