MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389266887 · doi:10.1007/s00300-023-03207-8

Prey consumption of bowhead whales in West Greenland estimated from drone measurements of body size and condition

2023· article· en· W4389266887 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Fredrik Christiansen, Outi M. Tervo, Mads Peter Heide‐Jørgensen, Jonas Teilmann

Bibliographic record

VenuePolar Biology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCarlsbergfondet
KeywordsBiologyDronePredationZoologyFisheryEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Understanding the energy requirement and prey consumption of Arctic predators is crucial to assess their vulnerability to climate change. The bowhead whale ( Balaena mysticetus ) is the largest predator of the Arctic, with Disko Bay in Greenland constituting a major feeding ground for a segment (predominantly larger juveniles and adult non-lactating females) of the Eastern Canada-West Greenland population. We used unmanned aerial vehicle photogrammetry to measure the body size and condition of bowhead whales in Disko Bay during the spring (March 26–June 1, 2022), from which we quantified their energy requirements and prey consumption. Measurements of body length, width and height were used to estimate the body volume and condition of juveniles (50 measurements from 39 individuals) and adults (232 measurements from 154 individuals). The body condition of adults increased at a rate of 0.112 percentage points day −1 , or 44.1–87.8 L of blubber day −1 (for lengths 13.0–17.0 m). Using published data from harvested whales, the estimated blubber mass gain was 37.1–73.9 kg day −1 , which equals an energy deposition rate of 1.01–2.01 GJ day −1 . Body maintenance costs were predicted from allometric models, while activity costs and the heat increment of feeding were derived from published archival tag data. Reported length-at-age curves were used to estimate somatic growth costs. The energy requirements for juveniles and adults were 0.621–0.778 GJ day −1 (for lengths 11.0–12.9 m) and 3.662–7.826 GJ day −1 (for lengths 13.0–17.0 m), respectively, which equals a prey consumption rate of 17–22 kg of prey day −1 (0.1% of body mass) and 102–218 kg day −1 (0.3% of body mass).

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)0.000
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 score0.127
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Citations11
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolar BiologySame topicMarine animal studies overviewFrench-language works237,207