MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2032857045 · doi:10.1139/f05-001

Foraging of royal albatrosses,<i>Diomedea epomophora</i>, from the Otago Peninsula and its relationships to fisheries

2005· article· en· W2032857045 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Susan M. Waugh, Dominique Filippi, Akira Fukuda, Makio Suzuki, Hiroyoshi Higuchi, Alvin N. Setiawan, Lloyd S. Davis

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForagingFishingPeninsulaFisheryGeographyAlbatrossContinental shelfOceanographyBiologyEcologyGeologyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Foraging zones used by incubating royal albatrosses (Diomedea epomophora) from the Otago Peninsula and their coincidence with fisheries activities were studied with global positioning system (GPS) loggers. Birds favoured areas around the shelf break of the eastern New Zealand continental mass, with hot spots of activity that coincided with fishing zones actively exploited by commercial trawl fisheries during the study period. Birds appeared to change their behaviours with proximity to fishing events, showing reduced speed and more direct flight when at moderate distances from fishing operations (12.5–25 km) than at greater distances. This relationship was significant for speed only (P < 0.029). Fishing operations for hoki (Macruronus novaezelandiae) and deep-sea species were those with the most numerous associations with royal albatross foraging flights and were also the most common during the study period. Waters along shelf breaks within 100 km of the breeding colony were extremely important for royal albatrosses, 28% of GPS locations being obtained within this radius from the Otago Peninsula study. Royal albatrosses from Campbell Island, studied previously, had also fed in this area extensively. Birds spent 2–19 days at sea, travelling 2000 km, on average, during their foraging trips.

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)0.000
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 score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.074

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.185 · 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

Citations24
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences→Same topicWildlife Ecology and Conservation→French-language works237,207→