MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

MATERNAL EFFECTS ON OFFSPRING MASS AND STAGE OF DEVELOPMENT AT BIRTH IN THE HARBOR SEAL,<i>PHOCA VITULINA</i>

2000· article· en· W2172568264 on OpenAlexafffund
Sara L. Ellis, W. Don Bowen, Daryl J. Boness, Sara J. Iverson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Mammalogy · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsBedford Institute of OceanographyFisheries and Oceans CanadaDalhousie University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaSmithsonian Institution
KeywordsOffspringPhocaBiologySeason of birthReproductionMaternal effectDemographyPregnancyZoologyEcologyAnimal science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We studied effects of maternal age, body mass, and parturition date on birth mass and stage of development at birth in harbor seals (Phoca vitulina) on Sable Island, Nova Scotia, over a 10-year period. As predicted, effects of maternal mass and age on pup traits varied with maternal age. Premature pups, characterized by extensive fetal pelage termed lanugo, weighed 20% less than newborns without lanugo and were born early in the season to low-body-mass females 4–6 years of age. Among intermediate-age females (7–10 years old), percentage of lanugo on pups was correlated negatively with female postpartum body mass but not with female age. Thus, maternal condition rather than age had stronger effects on stage of development of offspring at birth. Overall, maternal age explained 54% of the variance in birth mass, whereas postpartum mass of females explained only 20% of the variance. These relationships did not differ with sex of the pup, although male pups were 3.7% heavier than female pups. Effects of maternal age were strongest among young females; however, reproductive parity was more important than age itself in determining offspring birth mass.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.092
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.212
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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations42
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of MammalogySame topicMarine animal studies overviewFrench-language works237,207