Ringed Seals and Sea Ice in Canada’s Western Arctic: Harvest-Based Monitoring 1992–2011
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We examined the relationship between ringed seal body condition and reproduction and spring sea ice conditions in prime ringed seal habitat in Canada’s western Arctic during 1992 – 2011. Since 1970, ice conditions in east Amundsen Gulf and west Prince Albert Sound have shown only a slight trend toward earlier ice clearance (breakup) in spring (3 – 7 days per decade) (p < 0.10) and no trend toward later freeze-up or increased variability in timing of spring ice clearance. A subsistence harvest – based sample of 2281 ringed seals was obtained during 1992 – 2011 from Masoyak, a traditional hunting camp located on the northwest shore of west Prince Albert Sound and less than 5 km from east Amundsen Gulf. The results revealed a statistically significant trend of decreasing mean annual body condition of ringed seals (using an index of length-mass-blubber depth [LMD]: adults, 0.14 m1.5/kg0.5/y; subadults, 0.24 m1.5/kg0.5/y) over the past two decades. A parallel result was that mean annual body condition of adults and subadults was correlated with the timing of fast ice clearance in spring (later ice clearance = worse condition). This correlation was most obvious in the extreme ice years in all sex/age groupings and was statistically significant for subadults. In mature females sampled since 1992, annual ovulation rates averaged 92.4 ± 16.3% (SD) and were greater than 80%, and mostly at 100%, in all years but two. Failure to ovulate was obvious in 2005, the most extreme late ice clearance year in our series, when only 30.0% of the mature adult females sampled ovulated. At the same time, values for seal body condition indices (adult females, LMD = 11.3; adult males, LMD = 12.4) and percent pups in the harvest (3.3%) were among the lowest recorded, and spring ice clearance was 38 d later than the 1992 – 2011 average. While this and previous studies indicate that the seal population in this core habitat has recovered from natural and extreme-year sea ice fluctuations over the past four decades, the potentially magnified effect of several consecutive extreme ice years, compounded by the concurrent decline in seal body condition that we have now detected over the past 20 years, is of particular concern.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".