MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312279022 · doi:10.46867/ijcp.2007.20.02.04

The Long-term Consequences of Short-term Responses to Disturbance Experiences from Whalewatching Impact Assessment

2007· article· en· W4312279022 on OpenAlexafffund
David Lusseau, Lars Bejder

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Comparative Psychology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersKillam TrustsDalhousie UniversityFaculty of Graduate Studies, Dalhousie UniversityUniversity of Otago
KeywordsDisturbance (geology)Term (time)PopulationEcologyHabitatAbandonment (legal)OccupancyEnvironmental resource managementBiologyEnvironmental scienceDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Studies often use behavioral responses to detect the impact of given disturbances on animals. However, the observation of these short-term responses can often lead to contradicting results. Here we describe studies focusing on the impacts of whale watching to show how the biological relevance of short-term responses can be inferred from contextual information. They showed that short-term behavioral responses could have long-term consequences for individuals and their populations using information about variation in response magnitude with exposure levels, long term population biology data, and multiple response variables. They showed that the added energetic constraints of the responses can impair life functions and lead to influences on vital rates with the potential to affect population viability. Individuals will manage disturbances as another ecological variable and will assess its costs in relation to other energetic trade-offs associated with the occupancy of the habitat in which the disturbance takes place. This can lead to rapid shift in tactics to cope with the disturbance, such as shift from short-term avoidance tactics to long-term habitat abandonment. When individuals cannot elude proximity to the disturbance, their fitness is reduced as observed through reduced reproductive success. These studies provide mechanisms to inform the US National Research Councils’ Population Consequences of Acoustic Disturbance framework in which the influence of noise impact of on marine mammal conservation can be studied.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.874

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.454
Teacher spread0.385 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations117
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Comparative PsychologySame topicMarine animal studies overviewFrench-language works237,207