MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2044107158 · doi:10.7557/3.2669

Distribution and population structure of North Atlantic harbour seals (<i>Phoca vitulina</i>)

2010· article· en· W2044107158 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Liselotte Wesley Andersen, Morton Tange Olsen

Bibliographic record

VenueNAMMCO Scientific Publications · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhocaHarbourGeographyPopulationGenetic structureFisheryPopulation structureEcologyOceanographyBiologyGenetic variationGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A review of the known geographical distribution and current knowledge on the genetic population structure of harbour seals (Phoca vitulina) in the North Atlantic is presented. Based on a synthesis of the results fromfive different studies of neutral geneticmarkers (mtDNAand nuclear microsatellites, mainly) twelve genetically distinct populations were identified in the North Atlantic: USA/Canada, Iceland, west coast of Norway, Ireland-Scotland, English east coast, Channel area, Wadden Sea, Limfjord, Skagerrak, Kattegat, West Baltic, and East Baltic. Most of the studies addressed the population structure at the regional level, while only a few addressed the structuring at a local level, i.e. within countries. Due to the limited number of studies conducted, the identified population units were considered preliminary andmore detailed, local studies would probably reveal structuring on a finer scale. The choice of genetic markers, their properties, resolution in time and applicability in population structure studies is shortly discussed and compared to ecological methods used to delineate populations.

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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations21
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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