MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2996624117 · doi:10.14430/arctic69294

Beluga Vocalizations Decrease in Response to Vessel Traffic in the Mackenzie River Estuary

2019· article· en· W2996624117 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
William D. Halliday, Kevin Scharffenberg, Shannon A. MacPhee, Casey Hilliard, Xavier Mouy, Dustin Whalen, Lisa L. Loseto, Stephen J. Insley

Bibliographic record

VenueARCTIC · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaUniversity of ManitobaWildlife Conservation Society CanadaDalhousie UniversityFisheries and Oceans CanadaNatural Resources Canada
FundersNatural Resources CanadaFisheries and Oceans CanadaMarine Environmental Observation Prediction and Response NetworkW. Garfield Weston FoundationAurora Research InstituteFisheries Joint Management Committee
KeywordsBeluga WhaleBelugaEstuaryEnvironmental scienceArcticChannel (broadcasting)Sound (geography)FisheryOceanographyThe arcticGeographyGeologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Vessel traffic negatively affects marine mammals by causing behavioural disturbance, acoustic masking, contamination (i.e., oil spills), and ship strikes. Few studies have examined the effects of vessels on marine mammals in the Arctic, but beluga whales appear to be especially sensitive to vessel traffic. We examine how the vocalizations of belugas are impacted by vessel traffic in the Tarium Niryutait Marine Protected Area in the Mackenzie River estuary of the western Canadian Arctic. Between one and four acoustic recorders were deployed between June and August each year between 2015 and 2018 near the only shipping channel at this site. We examined beluga vocalizations from acoustic recordings over four summers and assessed how the distance to the nearest vessel passing the acoustic recorder affected the number of vocalizations. Beluga vocalizations within the range of the acoustic recorder decreased significantly when vessels were within 5 km of the acoustic recorder. This result suggests either that belugas are avoiding the vessel or that they reduce their vocalization in response to vessel traffic. Future work is needed to assess exactly how belugas are reacting to vessel traffic in this area and what the long-term consequences of these reactions are. Management measures for reducing these impacts must be carefully considered, especially since these vessels are very restricted in where they can travel, and many of the vessels are necessary for the livelihoods of local communities.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.002

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.229 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations29
Published2019
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueARCTICSame topicMarine animal studies overviewFrench-language works237,207