The relation of body size of male humpback whales to their social roles on the Hawaiian winter grounds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We examined the relation of body length of male humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae) to the social roles they adopted on the Hawaiian winter grounds: principal escort in a competitive group, secondary escort, lone escort to a mothercalf pair, male partner in a dyad, and singer. Using underwater videogrammetry, we measured body lengths of 17 principal escorts, 68 secondary escorts, 40 single escorts, 17 male partners, and 8 singers. Results revealed that (i) principal escorts were, on average, significantly larger than males in each of the remaining social roles except singer, (ii) singers were significantly larger than male partners, (iii) there were no significant size differences among secondary escorts, single escorts, or male partners. Further, principal escorts tended to be the largest or second-largest male within their individual competitive group. All principal escorts were of sizes that indicated a 0.81 probability or better of sexual maturity, based on whaling data. In comparison, more than half of the male partners, almost one-third of the secondary escorts, and one-fifth of the single escorts were of sizes that indicated a 0.5 probability or less of sexual maturity. Seven of the eight singers had a 0.9 probability or better of sexual maturity and the eighth singer a 0.5 probability. However, the data for singers are too few to allow firm conclusions to be reached about the relation of body size to singing. Overall, our findings suggest that body size confers an advantage in physical competition between male humpback whales, and that a large proportion of males adopting the role of secondary escort, single escort, and partner are likely to be sexually immature. Additionally, the competitive group appears to be a major reproductive unit in terms of bringing together a receptive female and potential mates.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".