Depredation of Patagonian toothfish (<i>Dissostichus eleginoides</i>) by two sympatrically occurring killer whale (<i>Orcinus orca</i>) ecotypes: Insights on the behavior of the rarely observed type D killer whales
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Sympatric forms of ecologically distinctive killer whales ( Orcinus orca ) have been documented worldwide. This study focused on a new case of such sympatric occurrence of the “Crozet” type and the recently described “type D” killer whales off the Crozet Islands. The two ecotypes are morphologically and genetically distinct, but they both depredate the same local longline fishery. We used observational, photo‐identification, and fishing data, collected between 2003 and 2015, to examine differences in their patterns of depredation. Of the 828 sets where ecotype could be confirmed, type D killer whales interacted with 82 (11%) of the sets, including 9 (1%) sets that were simultaneously depredated by both ecotypes. Associations between the two types were never observed. Type D killer whales typically occurred in larger groups and both ecotypes preferentially depredated Patagonian toothfish ( Dissostichus eleginoides ). GLMM modeling revealed that the probability of type D depredation significantly increased throughout the study period, especially in deep waters, and photo‐identification data suggested that a subset of all individuals were habituating to depredation. This study documents the partitioning of resources between two distinct ecotypes of killer whales and provides preliminary insight into the feeding ecology of the rare type D killer whale.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".