Evidence of intraspecific prey switching: stage-structured predation of polar bears on ringed seals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Prey switching is a phenomenon in which a predator disproportionately consumes the most abundant prey type, and switches to preferentially consume another prey type if the first becomes relatively rare. This concept may be expanded outside of its usual usage describing switching between prey species (interspecific), to describe switching between prey stages within a given species (intraspecific). Polar bears (Ursus maritimus) are thought to seek out naive ringed seal (Pusa hispida) pups in the spring, but how that may change in years with low seal productivity is unknown. We addressed two main questions: If polar bears typically select for ringed seals' pups, how does this change in years with reduced ringed-seal productivity? How does polar bear predation during years with low ringed-seal productivity impact the ringed seal population? We created a matrix population model for ringed seals to get an estimate of each stage's availability to polar bears in the spring. These estimates of availability were combined with existing studies on the ages of seals consumed by polar bears in years of both high and low ringed seal productivity. Our results suggest that polar bears typically strongly select for ringed seal pups, but switch to disproportionately select older ringed seals in years with low pup availability. The effects of this on ringed seal population growth appear negligible. Non-intuitive results on the effect of prey switching on the prey population emphasize the importance of considering environmental sequences rather than individual years.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".