MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2145448363 · doi:10.1139/z06-035

Coda vocalizations recorded in breeding areas are almost entirely produced by mature female sperm whales (<i>Physeter macrocephalus</i>)

2006· article· en· W2145448363 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Marianne Marcoux, Hal Whitehead, Luke Rendell

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersUniversity of Chinese Academy of SciencesInternational Fund for Animal Welfare
KeywordsCodaBiologySperm whaleSpermRange (aeronautics)ZoologyFisheryAcousticsGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigated the use and function of coda communication by sperm whales ( Physeter macrocephalus L., 1758 (= Physeter catodon L., 1758)). Codas are stereotyped patterns of clicks often made by sperm whales in social contexts. We used the pulsed structure of coda clicks recorded from socializing female/immature groups to estimate the body-length distribution of the animals producing the codas. Ninety-five percent of the 10 653 codas that we measured were produced by whales measuring from 9 to 11 m. This size range corresponds to the lengths of mature females. We compared these data to a length distribution calculated from photographic measurements of individuals from the same groups encountered during the same studies. There were more whales shorter than 8.5 m (10.0%) and longer than 12.5 m (2.7%) in the photographic length distribution than in that of the coda producers (0.30% and 0.08%, respectively). Since males leave their natal group when they are shorter than 9 m and return to breeding areas when they measure 13 m or more, our data show that the codas were produced almost entirely by mature females. We suggest that coda communication serves several functions, including social bonding.

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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.196 · 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

Citations34
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ZoologySame topicMarine animal studies overviewFrench-language works237,207