MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004236953 · doi:10.7557/3.2728

Seasonal and interannual variability in grey seal diets on Sable Island, eastern Scotian Shelf

2007· article· en· W2004236953 on OpenAlexaffabout
W. Don Bowen, G. D. Harrison

Bibliographic record

VenueNAMMCO Scientific Publications · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsBedford Institute of OceanographyFisheries and Oceans Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPredationNova scotiaFisheryOtolithSeasonalityAbundance (ecology)BiologyFish <Actinopterygii>GeographyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We studied seasonal and interannual variability in the diet of grey seals (Halichoerus grypus) using faecal samples collected from Sable Island, Nova Scotia between 1991 and 1998. More than 28,000 prey from at least 28 taxa were identified from 1,245 faecal samples collect mainly in spring, fall and winter. Sand lance (Ammodytes dubius) dominated the diet in all seasons and years, but the importance of this and other species varied over time. There was also evidence of seasonal and interannual variation in the size of prey consumed both within and among species. We compared diet composition with estimates of prey numbers and biomass from annual researchtrawl surveys conducted in March and July. Species-specific numerical corrections were applied to otolith counts to account for the complete digestion of otoliths, and fish catchability correction factors applied to trawl survey catches to account for trawl selectivity. Based on an odds ratio index of prey selectivity, grey seals positively selected sand lance in both seasons. Other species were either relatively avoided or eaten roughly in proportion to their estimated abundance.

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 score0.912
Threshold uncertainty score0.175

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations17
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNAMMCO Scientific PublicationsSame topicMarine animal studies overviewFrench-language works237,207