MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

DIET OF RINGED SEALS (<i>PHOCA HISPIDA</i>) ON THE EAST AND WEST SIDES OF THE NORTH WATER POLYNYA, NORTHERN BAFFIN BAY

2001· article· en· W2091785306 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Meike Holst, Ian Stirling, Keith A. Hobson

Bibliographic record

VenueMarine Mammal Science · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicIsotope Analysis in Ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaDirectorate for Biological Sciences
KeywordsFjordBayPhocaFisheryPredationArcticOceanographyBiologyEcologyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In conjunction with the International North Water Polynya Study (NOW) in northern Baffin Bay, we examined the diets of ringed seals (Phoca hispida)1on the west (Grise Fiord, Nunavut) and east (Qaanaaq, Greenland) sides of the polynya, using conventional stomach content analysis, as well as inferences from stable isotope ratios in seal muscle. Between May and July 1998, stomach and muscle tissue samples were collected from 99 ringed seals taken near Grise Fiord and 100 taken near Qaanaaq. The amphipodThemisto libellulawas the dominant prey type in the diet of immature ringed seals from Grise Fiord, whereas arctic cod (Boreogadus saida) and polar cod (Arctogadus glacialis) predominated in the diet of adults. Both immature and adult seals collected near Qaanaaq fed predominantly on arctic cod. Overall, seals collected near Grise Fiord had significantly higher δ13C values than those collected near Qaanaaq (P< 0.001), but there was no statistical separation in δ15N values between the two samples (P= 0.06). Differences in diets of ringed seals from the east and west sides of the North Water Polynya may be due to differences in prey distribution and/or differences in biological productivity and fish biomass within the polynya.

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 score0.809
Threshold uncertainty score0.379

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 studies0.0010.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.186 · 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

Citations87
Published2001
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMarine Mammal ScienceSame topicIsotope Analysis in EcologyFrench-language works237,207