The freshwater dolphin <i>Inia geoffrensis geoffrensis</i> produces high frequency whistles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Because whistles are most commonly associated with social delphinids, they have been largely overlooked, ignored, or presumed absent, in solitary freshwater dolphin species. Whistle production in the freshwater dolphin, the boto (Inia geoffrensis geoffrensis), has been controversial. Because of its sympatry with tucuxi dolphins (Sotalia fluviatilis), a whistling species, some presume tucuxi whistles might have been erroneously assigned to the boto. Using a broadband recording system, we recorded over 100 whistles from boto dolphins in the Yasunf River, Ecuador, where the tucuxi dolphins are absent. Our results therefore provide conclusive evidence for whistle production in Inia geoffrensis geoffrensis. Furthermore, boto whistles are significantly different from tucuxi whistles recorded in nearby rivers. The Ecuadorian boto whistle has a significantly greater frequency range (5.30-48.10 kHz) than previously reported in other populations (Peru and Colombia) that were recorded with more bandwidth limited equipment. In addition, the top frequency and the range are greater than in any other toothed whale species recorded to date. Whistle production was higher during resting activities, alone or in the presence of other animals. The confirmation of whistles in the boto has important implications for the evolution of whistles in Cetacea and their association with sociality.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".