MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2766839397 · doi:10.1093/icesjms/fsx197

Investigating the spatiotemporal variation of fish choruses to help identify important foraging habitat for Indo-Pacific humpback dolphins, Sousa chinensis

2017· article· en· W2766839397 on OpenAlexaff
Matthew K. Pine, Ding Wang, Lindsay Porter, Kexiong Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueICES Journal of Marine Science · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersChinese Academy of Sciences
KeywordsForagingIndo-PacificFisheryHabitatGeographyMainland ChinaTrawlingSeascapePredationChorusEcologyMainlandBiologyFish <Actinopterygii>China

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Given the common physical overlapping between coastal developments and important marine mammal habitats, there is a need to identify potentially important foraging grounds for dolphins when informing marine spatial planning and management of underwater noise. Hydrophones were deployed at four locations either side of the mainland China–Hong Kong Special Administrative Region border to monitor the presence of soniferous fishes; a key prey item for Indo-Pacific humpback dolphins. Five distinct chorus-types were identified; each showing spatiotemporal variability. Each chorus-type was assumed to represent a separate species. Chorus-type diversity also differed between sites, with SP4 and SP5 types only being detected within Hong Kong waters where bottom trawling is illegal. Chorus-type SP1 was only detected at the recording sites in mainland Chinese waters. Call rates and chorus duration were highest during the spring and summer months. Given these dolphins show a predator-prey relationship, these data provide new information on the local fish communities at a much finer-scale than fish landing records and a baseline of fish activity in an environment that is challenging to explore. Overlaid with acoustic detections of foraging dolphins, these data form a basis for identifying potentially important foraging habitats that should be afforded the highest priority for protection.

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 score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.069

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.271 · 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

Citations22
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueICES Journal of Marine ScienceSame topicMarine animal studies overviewFrench-language works237,207