Sea‐ice anomalies affect the acoustic presence of Antarctic pinnipeds in breeding areas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sea ice is crucial for breeding in true Antarctic pinnipeds. Although critical to interpret and mitigate the effects of extreme climatic events on polar species, knowledge of the effects of strong sea‐ice anomalies on the reproductive activity of true Antarctic pinnipeds is scarce. Underwater vocalizations in these species play a key role in reproduction and function as indicators for presence and breeding onset. Using 8 years of recordings, we quantified the effect of sea‐ice concentration and drift on the acoustic presence probability of four pinniped species in their breeding areas. In all four species, acoustic activity timing was constant across years, but decreased when sea‐ice cover conditions were <10%, suggesting that individuals may fail to anticipate rapid changes in sea‐ice cover. In the species’ traditional breeding areas, extreme and regular negative anomalies in early austral‐summer sea ice could affect long‐term reproductive success. Our findings underscore the urgent need for a better understanding of climate‐driven changes in high‐fidelity breeding areas to mitigate current and future anthropogenic pressures, and to sustain the integrity and functionality of the Southern Ocean's ecosystems.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".