A review of beaked whale (Ziphiidae) stranding incidents from the inshore waters of eastern Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cetaceans of the family Ziphiidae (beaked whales) include some of the least known whale species. We review 78 ziphiid stranding incidents from the inshore waters of eastern Canada (defined as the Atlantic provinces north to central Labrador, including the Gulf coast of Quebec, from ~latitude 43.5°N to 55.0°W), with outcomes that involve 84 individual whales. This includes all eastern Canadian ziphiid stranding incidents known to us from the first report of 24 February 1934 to 31 December 2021 for the five species documented from eastern Canada: Northern Bottlenose Whale (Hyperoodon ampullatus), Sowerby’s Beaked Whale (Mesoplodon bidens), Blainville’s Beaked Whale (Mesoplodon densirostris), True’s Beaked Whale (Mesoplodon mirus), and Cuvier’s Beaked Whale (Ziphius cavirostris). Northern Bottlenose Whale (41.0% of incidents, 40.4% of individuals) and Sowerby’s Beaked Whale (46.1% of incidents, 46.4% of individuals) have stranded most frequently, with the remaining three species stranding very rarely in the region. An average of 0.55 individual ziphiids/year were reported stranded from 1934 to 1999 in eastern Canada, but since 2000 this has increased to an average of 2.2 stranded individuals/year. Much of this increase is undoubtedly due to improved reporting, but other factors may also be involved. We emphasize the importance of the ongoing documentation of cetacean stranding incidents, but especially the need to better understand causes of ziphiid mortality, particularly for those species that reach the edge of their range in the western North Atlantic or are of conservation concern.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.011 | 0.017 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".