MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2102737255 · doi:10.1890/07-1050.1

POLAR BEAR DIETS AND ARCTIC MARINE FOOD WEBS: INSIGHTS FROM FATTY ACID ANALYSIS

2008· article· en· W2102737255 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueEcological Monographs · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhocaUrsus maritimusForagingPredationBeluga WhaleArcticBayBiologyBelugaMarine mammalEcologyFisheryApex predatorGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We used quantitative fatty acid signature analysis (QFASA) to examine the diets of 1738 individual polar bears ( Ursus maritimus ) sampled across the Canadian Arctic over a 30‐year span. Polar bear foraging varied over large and small spatial and temporal scales, and between demographic groups. Diets in every subpopulation were dominated by ringed seals ( Phoca hispida ) and, in the eastern Arctic, secondarily by harp seals ( Pagophilus groenlandica ). Beluga whales ( Delphinapterus leucas ) were an important food source for bears in the High Arctic, which is consistent with previous anecdotal reports. Foraging patterns were most similar among neighboring subpopulations with similar prey assemblages, but also differed geographically within Western Hudson Bay. The sexual size dimorphism of polar bears had an important effect on foraging, as large bearded seals ( Erignathus barbatus ) and walruses ( Odobenus rosmarus ) were consumed most often by older, male bears, whereas ringed seals and, where available, harbor seals ( P. vitulina ) were most important to younger age classes. Larger, older bears also had the greatest dietary diversity, apparently because of their ability to include larger‐bodied prey. During spring and summer, polar bears in some areas increased predation on migratory harp seals and beluga whales. In Western Hudson Bay, bearded seal consumption declined between 1995 and 2001 for both male and female bears and continued to decline among females up to the most recent sampling (2004). Ringed seal consumption in Western Hudson Bay increased between 1998 and 2001, perhaps in response to increased ringed seal productivity, but was not significantly affected by date of sea‐ice breakup. Overall, our data indicate that polar bears are capable of opportunistically altering their foraging to take advantage of locally abundant prey, or to some degree compensating for a decline in a dominant prey species. However, in other areas polar bears are dependent on the availability of ringed and bearded seals. Recent population data suggest that polar bears with the most specialized diets may be most vulnerable to climate‐related changes in ice conditions. The results of this large‐scale, ecosystem‐based study indicate a complex relationship between sea‐ice conditions, prey population dynamics, and polar bear foraging.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.188 · 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