Intrinsic and extrinsic sources of variation in the diets of harp and hooded seals revealed by fatty acid profiles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Individuals of different age, sex, and morphology are expected to exhibit differences in dietary niches largely owing to sexual dimorphism, ontogenetic niche shifts, and resource polymorphism. Harp ( Pagophilus groenlandicus (Erxleben, 1777)) and hooded ( Cystophora cristata (Erxleben, 1777)) seals are geographically overlapping and highly migratory predators in the North Atlantic Ocean. These species differ in their diving behaviour, with hooded seals diving deeper, longer, and more associated with the continental shelf edge and deep ocean than harp seals. We examined blubber fatty acid (FA) composition (N = 37; 93% of total FA by mass) of harp (adults N = 294; juveniles N = 232) and hooded (adults N = 118; juveniles N = 38) seals to test hypotheses about sources of intrinsic (age and sex) and extrinsic (geographic location, season, year) variations in diets. A significant difference in FA profiles suggested dietary segregation between species. We found significant effects of sex and age class on FA profiles, with these being more pronounced in the highly size-dimorphic hooded seals than in harp seals. FA profiles of both species also varied between inshore and offshore sampling locations and between prebreeding and postbreeding periods. Finally, FA profiles of harp seals differed among years, which was coincident with large changes in prey distribution and availability in the mid-1990s.
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".