Growth rates of vibrissae of harbor seals (<i>Phoca vitulina</i>) and Steller sea lions (<i>Eumetopias jubatus</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Growth rates of vibrissae (whiskers), which act as a temporal record of feeding in harbor seals (Phoca vitulina) and Steller sea lions (Eumetopias jubatus), were estimated using13C- and15N-labeled glycine followed by stable-isotope analysis. The labeled glycine was incorporated into keratin and served as a temporal marker for growth-rate calculation. One captive harbor seal received two doses 147 days apart, while a second seal received one dose; vibrissae were analyzed after 86 and 154 days. The peak positions indicated that growth began in the fall, continued into spring, but ceased in June, with active growth rates of 0.33 mm/day. Two adult captive Steller sea lions each received two labeled doses during a 308-day period. After 427 days vibrissae in both sea lions showed two peaks corresponding to the markers; growth rates were calculated as 0.050.07 mm/day. Growth rates in captive juvenile and wild adult Steller sea lions, 0.100.17 mm/day, supported the assumption that major isotopic oscillations in vibrissae of wild sea lions were annual. The multiyear records imply that Steller sea lions retain their vibrissae; harbor seal vibrissae, in contrast, have periods of rapid growth and appear to be shed, at least in part, annually.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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".