MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

SUCKLING BEHAVIOR IN SPERM WHALE CALVES: OBSERVATIONS AND HYPOTHESES

2007· article· en· W2123498393 on OpenAlexaff
Shane Gero, Hal Whitehead

Bibliographic record

VenueMarine Mammal Science · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPeduncle (anatomy)Sperm whaleWhaleBiologySpermAnatomyCerebral peduncleZoologyMarine mammalCetaceaFisheryBotanyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This study is the first to describe quantitatively the apparent suckling behavior of sperm whale, Physeter macrocephalus (Linnaeus, 1758), calves using observations from both above and below the surface. Peduncle dives are short (mean 14 s) dives made by sperm whale calves beside the peduncle of an adult female, which were previously assumed to be indicative of suckling. Photo‐identification and focal calf‐follows were used to collect data during 177 peduncle dive bouts from 22 different calves (11 calves from the Caribbean Sea, 11 from the Sargasso Sea), one of which was followed on forty different days. We found that peduncle diving in sperm whale calves is laterally asymmetrical with a bias to the left side of the escorting adult (69.8% of peduncle dives) and that calves generally do not switch sides during a bout of peduncle dives (switches occurred in only 10.8% of bouts). Further subsurface observations gave insight into potential alternative functions of peduncle diving. These alternative hypotheses, including nasal suckling, and the existing supporting evidence for each are discussed. It is likely that peduncle diving is related to suckling but that the exact function of the dives and manner in which sperm whale calves ingest milk remains unclear.

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)0.001
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations31
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMarine Mammal Science→Same topicMarine animal studies overview→French-language works237,207→