Implantation date, growth rate, and allometric relationships in foetal Northwest Atlantic harp seals (<i>Phoca groenlandica</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Using a sample of 150 female and 141 male foetal Northwest Atlantic harp seals (Phoca groenlandica) collected between October and February of 1980-1995, we determined that the allometric relationship between total body mass and standard length did not differ between sexes and did not differ from the relationship calculated for foetal harp seals from the study of Stewart and co-workers (R.E.A. Stewart, B.E. Stewart, D.M. Lavigne, and G.W. Miller. 1989. Can. J. Zool. 67: 2147-2157). Combining the data for foetuses from both studies, the exponent of the mass-length relationship was 2.75, significantly different from 3. Except for very small foetuses (<20 cm) standard length and mass1/2.75 increased linearly as gestation progressed. Equations are provided to estimate standard length and total mass of foetuses in the period August-February and to estimate sculp mass, core mass, and axillary girth from length for the period October-February. The most reliable estimate of implantation date (day 223, 11 August) was obtained by regressing sampling date1/2 on mass1/2.75.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".