MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4308968803 · doi:10.1038/s41598-022-24107-7

Current global population size, post-whaling trend and historical trajectory of sperm whales

2022· article· en· W4308968803 on OpenAlexaff
Hal Whitehead, Megan Shin

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWhalingPopulationSpermWhaleSperm whaleBiologyFisheryRight whaleAbundance (ecology)EcologyGeographyDemographyOceanographyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The sperm whale lives in most deep ice-free waters of the globe. It was targeted during two periods of whaling peaking in the 1840's and 1960's. Using a habitat suitability model, we extrapolated estimates of abundance from visual and acoustic surveys to give a global estimate of 736,053 sperm whales (CV = 0.218) in 1993. Estimates of trends in the post-whaling era suggest that: whaling, by affecting the sex ratio and/or the social cohesion of females, reduced recovery rates well after whaling ceased; preferentially-targeted adult males show the best evidence of recovery, presumably due to recruitment from breeding populations; several decades post-whaling, sperm whale populations not facing much human impact are recovering slowly, but populations may be declining in areas with substantial anthropogenic footprint. A theta-logistic population model enhanced to simulate spatial structure and the non-removal impacts of whaling indicated a pre-whaling population of 1,949,698 (CV = 0.178) in 1710 being reduced by whaling, and then then recovering a little to about 844,761 (CV = 0.209) in 2022. There is much uncertainty about these numbers and trends. A larger population estimate than produced by a similar analysis in 2002 is principally due to a better assessment of ascertainment bias.

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)0.001
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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Citations42
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicMarine animal studies overviewFrench-language works237,207