Social structure of Risso’s dolphins (Grampus griseus) at the Azores: a stratified community based on highly associated social units
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, we present for the first time a model for the social structure of Risso’s dolphins ( Grampus griseus Cuvier, 1812). Over the period 2004–2006, 1028 Risso’s dolphins were identified at Pico island, Azores. Individuals sighted on 10 or more occasions were included in the analysis of social structure (n = 183). High resighting rates indicate strong site fidelity for at least part of the population. We found that individuals form stable, long-term bonds organised in pairs or in clusters of 3–12 individuals. Social structure is stratified based on age and sex classes, with strong associations between adult males and between adult females. We suggest that clusters form the basic units of Risso’s dolphin society. Thirteen pods consisting solely of adults, likely males, and 3 pods consisting of mother–calf pairs were identified. Males are organised in stable, long-term associations of varying size that occur throughout the complete range of behavioural states observed. For females, associations can be of similar strength, but the time scale may vary depending on the presence of nursing calves. As subadults, associations also occur (pair formation), but are less stable than those observed for adults. We propose a new model for Risso’s dolphin societies known as a stratified social organisation, which differs from the fission–fusion and matrilineal society models.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".