MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2155316349 · doi:10.1017/s0954102005002452

Possible food caching and defence in the Weddell seal: observations from McMurdo Sound, Antarctica

2005· article· en· W2155316349 on OpenAlexaff
S.L. Kim, Kathleen E. Conlan, Daniel P. Malone, Craig V.W. Lewis

Bibliographic record

VenueAntarctic Science · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsCanadian Museum of Nature
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHoarding (animal behavior)CorvidaeBenthic zoneSound (geography)EcologyBiologyTaxonVertebrateZoologyGeographyOceanographyForagingGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

On the basis of observations of Weddell seals (Leptonychotes weddellii Lesson) made in the course of studying shallow-water benthic communities in McMurdo Sound, Antarctica, we suggest that caching and/or defence of uneaten food may be a strategy practiced by this animal. Such a phenomenon is uncommon but taxonomically widespread among vertebrates. Depending on circumstances, it is termed hoarding, caching, or storage and may be short- or long-term, include defence of the resource, or have other variable expressions, with the common threads being deferred consumption and deterrence of consumption by others (Vanderwall 1990). Many vertebrate taxa exhibit hoarding behaviour, including rodents (e.g. Sciuridae), carnivores (e.g. Canidae, Felinidae) and birds (e.g. Corvidae, Picidae). No form of food caching, to our knowledge, has ever been reported in a wild pinniped.

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 score0.075
Threshold uncertainty score0.149

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Citations18
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAntarctic ScienceSame topicMarine animal studies overviewFrench-language works237,207