MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2124878080 · doi:10.1139/f04-086

Availability to Steller sea lions (<i>Eumetopias jubatus</i>) of a seasonal prey resource: a prespawning aggregation of eulachon (<i>Thaleichthys pacificus</i>)

2004· article· en· W2124878080 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Michael F. Sigler, Jamie N. Womble, Johanna J. Vollenweider

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBayPredationSea lionFisheryAbundance (ecology)GeographyBiologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The availability of seasonally abundant energy-rich prey can be a significant factor for the survival and reproductive success of predator populations. Large numbers of Steller sea lions (Eumetopias jubatus) were attracted to a prespawning aggregation of eulachon (Thaleichthys pacificus) in Berners Bay in southeast Alaska during April–May in 2002 and 2003. Sea lion abundance increased as eulachon gathered in Berners Bay, peaked as eulachon abundance peaked, and decreased as the eulachon moved up-river. As sea lion abundance increased in Berners Bay, sea lion abundance decreased at Benjamin Island, a sea lion haulout located 22 km away. The eulachon provided an abundant, energy-rich, predictable prey source for the Steller sea lions: (i) eulachon energy density was 9.70 ± 0.24 kJ·g–1, much higher than that of any forage species reported in the North Pacific Ocean except northern lampfish (Stenobrachius leucopsarus); (ii) a large surplus of prey was available per sea lion while the eulachon aggregation was present; and (iii) the spawning run usually begins between late April and early May. The eulachon pulse may be critical to Steller sea lions during a period of high energetic demands.

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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.204 · 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

Citations63
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic SciencesSame topicMarine animal studies overviewFrench-language works237,207