MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4396918824 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0302758

Killer whale respiration rates

2024· article· en· W4396918824 on OpenAlexafffund
Tess M. McRae, Beth L. Volpov, Evan Sidrow, Sarah M. E. Fortune, Marie Auger‐Méthé, Nancy Heckman, Andrew W. Trites

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersBritish Columbia Knowledge Development FundNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsFisheries and Oceans CanadaHakai InstituteCanada Foundation for Innovation
KeywordsForagingRespirationJuvenileWhaleBiologyEcologyAnimal scienceEnvironmental scienceZoologyAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Measuring breathing rates is a means by which oxygen intake and metabolic rates can be estimated to determine food requirements and energy expenditure of killer whales (Orcinus orca) and other cetaceans. This relatively simple measure also allows the energetic consequences of environmental stressors to cetaceans to be understood but requires knowing respiration rates while they are engaged in different behaviours such as resting, travelling and foraging. We calculated respiration rates for different behavioural states of southern and northern resident killer whales using video from UAV drones and concurrent biologging data from animal-borne tags. Behavioural states of dive tracks were predicted using hierarchical hidden Markov models (HHMM) parameterized with time-depth data and with labeled tracks of drone-identified behavioural states (from drone footage that overlapped with the time-depth data). Dive tracks were sequences of dives and surface intervals lasting ≥ 10 minutes cumulative duration. We calculated respiration rates and estimated oxygen consumption rates for the predicted behavioural states of the tracks. We found that juvenile killer whales breathed at a higher rate when travelling (1.6 breaths min-1) compared to resting (1.2) and foraging (1.5)-and that adult males breathed at a higher rate when travelling (1.8) compared to both foraging (1.7) and resting (1.3). The juveniles in our study were estimated to consume 2.5-18.3 L O2 min-1 compared with 14.3-59.8 L O2 min-1 for adult males across all behaviours based on estimates of mass-specific tidal volume and oxygen extraction. Our findings confirm that killer whales take single breaths between dives and indicate that energy expenditure derived from respirations requires using sex, age, and behavioural-specific respiration rates. These findings can be applied to bioenergetics models on a behavioural-specific basis, and contribute towards obtaining better predictions of dive behaviours, energy expenditure and the food requirements of apex predators.

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.249
Teacher spread0.188 · 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

Citations11
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONE→Same topicMarine animal studies overview→French-language works237,207→