Have whales returned to a historical hotspot of industrial whaling? The pattern of southern right whale Eubalaena australis recovery at South Georgia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Around 176500 whales were killed in the sub-Antarctic waters off South Georgia (South Atlantic) between 1904 and 1965. In recent decades, whales have once again become summer visitors, with the southern right whale (SRW) the most commonly reported species until 2011. Here, we assess the distribution, temporal pattern, health status and likely prey of SRWs in these waters, combining observations from a summertime vessel-based expedition to South Georgia, stable isotope data collected from SRWs and putative prey and sightings reports collated by the South Georgia Museum. The expedition used directional acoustics and visual surveys to localise whales and collected skin biopsies and photo-IDs. During 76 h of visual observation effort over 19 expedition days, SRWs were encountered 15 times (~31 individuals). Photo-IDs, combined with publicly contributed images from commercial vessels, were reconciled and quality-controlled to form a catalogue of 6 fully (i.e. both sides) identified SRWs and 26 SRWs identified by either left or right sides. No photo-ID matches were found with lower-latitude calving grounds, but 3 whales had gull lesions supporting a direct link with Península Valdés, Argentina. The isotopic position of SRWs in the South Georgia food web suggests feeding on a combination of copepod and krill species. Opportunistic reports of SRW sightings and associated group sizes remain steady over time, while humpback whales provide a strong contrast, with increased sighting rates and group sizes seen since 2013. These data suggest a plateau in SRWs and an increasing humpback whale presence in South Georgia waters following the cessation of whaling.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".