MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2997903455 · doi:10.1121/1.5139422

High-amplitude vocalizations of male northern elephant seals and associated ambient noise on a breeding rookery

2019· article· en· W2997903455 on OpenAlexaff
Brandon L. Southall, Caroline Casey, Marla M. Holt, Stephen J. Insley, Colleen Reichmuth

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsWildlife Conservation Society Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRookeryElephant sealAmbient noise levelAmplitudeNoise (video)BioacousticsEnvironmental scienceEcologyBiologyAcousticsPhysicsSound (geography)DemographyComputer sciencePopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Northern elephant seals (Mirounga angustirostris) are massive, land-breeding marine mammals that produce loud, stereotyped calls during annual breeding seasons. To determine vocalization source levels emitted by competing males on a mainland breeding rookery, aerial calls were measured on-axis at 1 m from adult males using three different sound pressure level metrics. Time-averaged (1 min) ambient noise was also measured under variable environmental and social conditions. Results indicate that male northern elephant seals emit high amplitude airborne calls with little variation in call amplitude. Mean source levels ranged from 98 to 114 dB re: 20 μPa [root-mean-square (rms) -fast], 102-116 dB re: 20 μPa (rms-impulse), and 120-131 dB re: 20 μPa (peak) and average standard deviations for all metrics were <2.3 dB. Further, these seal rookeries exhibit high variability in ambient noise (in terms of both spectrum and amplitude) from biotic and environmental sources. Finally, males sampled did not adjust call amplitude to compensate for higher background noise levels and thus did not exhibit a Lombard effect. These findings reinforce the view that the remarkable vocalizations of male northern elephant seals serve as rigid and powerful signals that convey individual identity within noisy breeding colonies rather than as honest indicators of size, status, or motivation.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations33
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of AmericaSame topicMarine animal studies overviewFrench-language works237,207