Movements and distribution of northern bottlenose whales,<i>Hyperoodon ampullatus</i>, on the Scotian Slope and in adjacent waters
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A small, apparently isolated, and endangered population of ~130 northern bottlenose whales (Hyperoodon ampullatus Forster, 1770) is found on the Scotian Slope south of Nova Scotia, Canada. Virtually all previous information on these animals had come from the Gully, a large submarine canyon where the northern bottlenose whales can be reliably found. A ship survey along the 1000 m depth contour in 2001 showed northern bottlenose whales only in the Gully, Shortland canyon (50 km east of the Gully), and Haldimand canyon (100 km east of the Gully). Studies in 2002 reconfirmed the presence of the whales in these other canyons, although densities were about 50% lower than in the Gully. Photo-identifications showed that individuals moved between the Gully and Shortland and Haldimand canyons over periods from days to years, with mean stays in any canyon of about 22 days. However, the population was not fully mixed: at least some individuals had preferences for particular canyons. The sex ratios were similar in all canyons, but males had higher rates of movement between canyons. These results are consistent with the expectations of optimal foraging theory, when the primary resource for females, deep-water squid of the genus Gonatus Gray, 1849, is more temporally stable than the primary resource for males, which is assumed to be receptive females. Haldimand and Shortland canyons are clearly important habitat for this species, and should receive appropriate protection.
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) | 0.001 | 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".