MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2021685470 · doi:10.1890/06-0546.1

QUANTIFYING THE SENSITIVITY OF ARCTIC MARINE MAMMALS TO CLIMATE-INDUCED HABITAT CHANGE

2008· review· en· W2021685470 on OpenAlexaff
Kristin L. Laidre, Ian Stirling, Lloyd F. Lowry, Øystein Wiig, Mads Peter Heide‐Jørgensen, Steven H. Ferguson

Bibliographic record

VenueEcological Applications · 2008
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsFisheries and Oceans Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArcticEcologyClimate changeHabitatSea iceUrsus maritimusPopulationRange (aeronautics)Species distributionMarine mammalVital ratesEnvironmental changeBiologyGeographyPopulation growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We review seven Arctic and four subarctic marine mammal species, their habitat requirements, and evidence for biological and demographic responses to climate change. We then describe a pan-Arctic quantitative index of species sensitivity to climate change based on population size, geographic range, habitat specificity, diet diversity, migration, site fidelity, sensitivity to changes in sea ice, sensitivity to changes in the trophic web, and maximum population growth potential (R(max)). The index suggests three types of sensitivity based on: (1) narrowness of distribution and specialization in feeding, (2) seasonal dependence on ice, and (3) reliance on sea ice as a structure for access to prey and predator avoidance. Based on the index, the hooded seal, the polar bear, and the narwhal appear to be the three most sensitive Arctic marine mammal species, primarily due to reliance on sea ice and specialized feeding. The least sensitive species were the ringed seal and bearded seal, primarily due to large circumpolar distributions, large population sizes, and flexible habitat requirements. The index provides an objective framework for ranking species and focusing future research on the effects of climate change on Arctic marine mammals. Finally, we distinguish between highly sensitive species and good indicator species and discuss regional variation and species-specific ecology that confounds Arctic-wide generalization regarding the effects of climate change.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.173
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.178 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations755
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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