Tag-based estimates of bottlenose dolphin swimming behavior and energetics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Current estimates of marine mammal hydrodynamic forces tend to be made using camera-based kinematic data for a limited number of fluke strokes during a prescribed swimming task. In contrast, biologging tag data yield kinematic measurements from thousands of strokes, enabling new insights into swimming behavior and mechanics. However, there have been limited tag-based estimates of mechanical work and power. In this work, we investigated bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus) swimming behavior using tag-measured kinematics and a hydrodynamic model to estimate propulsive power, work and cost of transport. Movement data were collected from six animals during prescribed straight-line swimming trials to investigate swimming mechanics over a range of sustained speeds (1.9-6.1 m s-1). Propulsive power ranged from 66 W to 3.8 kW over 282 total trials. During the lap trials, the dolphins swam at depths that mitigated wave drag, reducing overall drag throughout these mid- to high-speed tasks. Data were also collected from four individuals during undirected daytime (08:30-18:00 h) swimming to examine how self-selected movement strategies are used to modulate energetic efficiency and effort. Overall, self-selected swimming speeds (individual means ranging from 1.0 to 1.96 m s-1) tended to minimize cost of transport, and were on the lower range of animal-preferred speeds reported in literature. The results indicate that these dolphins moderate propulsive effort and efficiency through a combination of speed and depth regulation. This work provides new insights into dolphin swimming behavior in both prescribed tasks and self-selected swimming, and presents a path forward for continuous estimates of mechanical work and power from wild animals.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".