MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2315528589 · doi:10.47536/jcrm.v13i1.550

Growth and maturity of belugas (Delphinapterus leucas) in Cumberland Sound, Canada, and in captivity: evidence for two growth layer groups (GLGs) per year in teeth

2023· article· en· W2315528589 on OpenAlexaffabout
P. Brodie, Kelly S. Ramirez, Martin Haulena

Bibliographic record

Venue˜The œjournal of cetacean research and management. Special issue · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsVancouver Aquarium
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBeluga WhaleLeucasBelugaCaptivityBiologySexual maturityHabitatEcologyZoologyMarine mammalArcticPredationFisheryGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The beluga (Delphinapterus leucas) is one of the few cetaceans to adapt, year-round, to an Arctic environment, one of the most challenging marine habitats, incorporating shallow estuaries, high turbidity, shifting pack-ice and extreme tidal ranges. Adaptation is attributed in part, to year-round herd integrity and synchrony, occupying a sequence of restricted seasonal habitats and calving sites, which are reflected in tooth laminae. Field research, 1966–1969, led to the conclusion that females are sexually mature at 5.75 years and males at 8.75 years, gestation is 15–16 months, reproductive cycle 3 years, with a lifespan of 30–35 years. Newborn and the first four year-classes are recognisable by length, body colour and morphology. The two-year nursing period results in rapid growth, coincident with a training period to acquire social, feeding, and crucial under-ice navigational skills. Belugas in Cumberland Sound had been reduced through exploitation, thus it is unlikely that present numbers are food limited, reflecting maximum rate of increase. We examine growth indices for captive belugas, either captured as calves, or first and second generations born in captivity, to compare known-age animals. Onset of sexual maturity in males and females is similar to findings for Cumberland Sound, which was based on two growth layer groups per year in the teeth, or GLG/2. We analyse studies where previous oral doses of tetracycline, as well as bomb radiocarbon 14C from 1958 were used to argue for single annual GLGs or GLG/1. Dedicated field studies, using appropriate dosage of intramuscular tetracycline, provide evidence for GLG/2. The 14C study appears to have been compromised by preparation technique and burdens sampled in the 1990s may have been of maternal origin, transferred during foetal growth and nursing, or from recent fallout to 1980. Fundamental to the issue of growth-at-age: arguments for GLG/1 are based on back-calculation from adults of unknown age, while GLG/2 is based on projection from newborn to known-age young and adults. Direct observations and cross-referenced parameters do not substantiate GLG/1, which requires halving the growth rate, thus doubling the age of sexual and physical maturity as well as lifespan, resulting in a 40% reduction of the intrinsic rate of natural increase, substantially lower than the present rate of recovery observed.

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)0.001
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 score0.177
Threshold uncertainty score0.356

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.272 · 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

Citations12
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue˜The œjournal of cetacean research and management. Special issueSame topicMarine animal studies overviewFrench-language works237,207