MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3094230848 · doi:10.47536/jcrm.vi.304

The 2005 Galápagos humpback whale expedition: a first attempt to assess and characterise the population in the Archipelago

2020· article· en· W3094230848 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Fernando Félix, Daniel M. Palacios, Sandie Salazar, Susana Caballero, Ben Haase, Jéssica Falconí

Bibliographic record

Venue˜The œjournal of cetacean research and management. Special issue · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSouthwest Fisheries Science CenterOffice of Naval ResearchDalhousie UniversityCetacean Society International
KeywordsArchipelagoGeographyFisheryPeninsulaOceanographyRange (aeronautics)PopulationHumpback whaleStock (firearms)WhaleBiologyGeologyArchaeologyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It has been known for some time that humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae) occur in waters of the Galápagos Islands, an oceanic archipelagolocated 1,000km west of Ecuador, South America (1°S, 91°W), but their presence there has been poorly documented. Although presumed, nolinkage has been established between Galápagos and southeast Pacific humpback whales (Breeding Stock G), the nearest breeding stock. Anexpedition to Galápagos was carried out between 31 August and 10 September 2005 to document the presence of humpback whales, their distribution,and their relationship to other stocks in the Pacific. Surveys covered 722km of the central and southern parts of the archipelago. Only one adultwith a newborn calf was found at Santa Fé Island (0°47’S, 90°05.1’W), yielding an encounter rate of 0.27 whales per 100km of survey. A hydrophonewith a response frequency range of 0.25–25kHz was dropped 25 times, but no whale sounds were heard. A skin sample was obtained by darting ofthe adult at Santa Fé, and was used for genetic analysis of the mtDNA control region. The haplotype of the Galápagos specimen has been found ina few individuals sampled previously off Colombia, Ecuador and the Antarctic Peninsula, thus establishing at least some degree of relatedness withBreeding Stock G. The observations, combined with a compilation of historical and recent sighting information in the archipelago, support the ideathat Galápagos is a breeding area for the species. Further studies are needed to establish the level of discreteness, size and other basic aspects of theGalápagos humpback whale population.

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 score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.084

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.252 · 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

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue˜The œjournal of cetacean research and management. Special issueSame topicMarine animal studies overviewFrench-language works237,207