MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3010377698 · doi:10.1002/ece3.6142

Amino acid δ<sup>15</sup>N underestimation of cetacean trophic positions highlights limited understanding of isotopic fractionation in higher marine consumers

2020· article· en· W3010377698 on OpenAlexafffund
Cory J. D. Matthews, RI Ruiz-Cooley, Corinne Pomerleau, Steven H. Ferguson

Bibliographic record

VenueEcology and Evolution · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicIsotope Analysis in Ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaFisheries and Oceans Canada
FundersFisheries and Oceans CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsTrophic levelIsotope analysisBiologyEnvironmental chemistryEcologyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Compound‐specific stable isotope analysis (CSIA) of amino acids (AAs) has been rapidly incorporated in ecological studies to resolve consumer trophic position (TP). Differential 15 N fractionation of “trophic” AAs, which undergo trophic 15 N enrichment, and “source” AAs, which undergo minimal trophic 15 N enrichment and serve as a proxy for primary producer δ 15 N values, allows for internal calibration of TP. Recent studies, however, have shown the difference between source and trophic AA δ 15 N values in higher marine consumers is less than predicted from empirical studies of invertebrates and fish. To evaluate CSIA‐AA for estimating TP of cetaceans, we compared source and trophic AA δ 15 N values of multiple tissues (skin, baleen, and dentine collagen) from five species representing a range of TPs: bowhead whales, beluga whales, short‐beaked common dolphins, sperm whales, and fish‐eating (FE) and marine mammal‐eating (MME) killer whale ecotypes. TP estimates (TP CSIA ) using several empirically derived equations and trophic discrimination factors (TDFs) were 1–2.5 trophic steps lower than stomach content‐derived estimates (TP SC ) for all species. Although TP CSIA estimates using dual TDF equations were in better agreement with TP SC estimates, our data do not support the application of universal or currently available dual TDFs to estimate cetacean TPs. Discrepancies were not simply due to inaccurate TDFs, however, because the difference between consumer glutamic acid/glutamine (Glx) and phenylalanine (Phe) δ 15 N values (δ 15 N Glx‐Phe ) did not follow expected TP order. In contrast to pioneering studies on invertebrates and fish, our data suggest trophic 15 N enrichment of Phe is not negligible and should be examined among the potential mechanisms driving “compressed” and variable δ 15 N Glx‐Phe values at high TPs. We emphasize the need for controlled diet studies to understand mechanisms driving AA‐specific isotopic fractionation before widespread application of CSIA‐AA in ecological studies of cetaceans and other marine consumers.

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 categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
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
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations36
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcology and EvolutionSame topicIsotope Analysis in EcologyFrench-language works237,207