Growth and shedding of harbor seal (<i>Phoca vitulina</i>) whiskers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Accurate and precise estimates of the timing of whisker growth and shedding are necessary to interpret biochemical information stored in whiskers. This fine-scale examination of harbor seal ( Phoca vitulina Linnaeus, 1758) whisker growth and shedding identified an asymptotic growth pattern with initial rapid growth that decays over time that can be defined with the von Bertalanffy curve. Initial growth rates were similar among whiskers, but estimated growth coefficients ( K) and asymptotic lengths ( L∞) differed by follicle positions suggesting that differences in total whisker lengths result from dissimilarly shaped growth curves. In other words, longer whisker length is attained by delaying the growth rate decay. There was substantial intra- and interseal variation in shedding dates; whisker shedding began at the caudal margin of the whisker bed and progressed toward the nose. Shedding of marked whiskers from the three study seals took from 78 to 133 days; however, selecting whiskers only from the most caudal follicle of the bottom three rows constrained the period of whisker shedding to 7–43 days. These differences in growth and shedding of harbor seal whiskers emphasize the importance of considering follicle position to select whiskers that are the most similar for analyses of information stored in whiskers.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".