MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2962769920 · doi:10.1093/plankt/fbz024

North Atlantic right whale ( <i>Eubalaena glacialis</i> ) and its food: (I) a spatial climatology of <i>Calanus</i> biomass and potential foraging habitats in Canadian waters

2019· article· en· W2962769920 on OpenAlexaffabout
Stéphane Plourde, Caroline Lehoux, Catherine L. Johnson, Geneviève Perrin, Véronique Lesage

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Plankton Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsBedford Institute of OceanographyFisheries and Oceans Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRight whaleCalanusCalanus finmarchicusForagingCopepodBayBiomass (ecology)KrillOceanographyWater columnFisheryWhaleEcologyContext (archaeology)HabitatWhalingZooplanktonPredationEnvironmental scienceGeographyBiologyCrustaceanGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This study aimed at identifying potentially suitable foraging habitats for the North Atlantic right whale (NARW; Eubalaena glacialis) in the Gulf of St Lawrence (GSL), on the Scotian Shelf (SS) and in the Bay of Fundy (BoF), Canada, based on the distribution densities of their main prey, Calanus copepod species. More than 4800 historical Calanus spp. water column integrated samples as well as 221 vertically stratified sampling stations were used to create a 3D (latitude, longitude and vertical) climatology of Calanus spp. biomass densities for spring and summer–fall when NARW are feeding in Canadian waters. We then combined this 3D preyscape with bio-energetic considerations to highlight potentially suitable NARW foraging habitats in the region. Our 3D climatological approach successfully identified the known feeding areas of Grand Manan (BoF) and Roseway Basin (western SS), confirming its validity. Expanding our analyses to the GSL and other parts of the SS, we identified in both regions areas previously unknown where Calanus spp. biomass densities exceeded minimum levels suitable for foraging NARW. Our results represent a key contribution to the identification of important foraging areas for NARW in Canadian waters, especially in the context of climate change and the documented shift in NARW distribution.

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 score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.095

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.246 · 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

Citations43
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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