MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404047954 · doi:10.2192/ursus-d-23-00028

Possible sexually selected infanticide by polar bears in western Hudson Bay

2024· article· en· W4404047954 on OpenAlexaffabout
David McGeachy, Nicholas J. Lunn, Andrew E. Derocher

Bibliographic record

VenueUrsus · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBayGeographyBiologyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Infanticide occurs in a diversity of taxa and may provide benefits to the perpetrator through nutritional gain, reduced competition, or increased fitness from mating opportunities through sexually selected infanticide (SSI). Infanticide, however, is rarely observed. We documented a probable infanticide event by a 23-year-old adult male polar bear (Ursus maritimus) on a 3-month-old cub in western Hudson Bay, Canada, during the spring of 2023. We subsequently documented a 21-year-old solitary female who was lactating and in breeding condition with swollen labia, suggesting polar bears return to estrous quickly in the absence of cubs. Using the literature, we examined the relationships among polar bear cub-of-the-year, adult male survival, and the ratio of male/female mortality. We suggest SSI as the plausible explanation for the infanticide event observed and discuss how indirect effects from climate change may affect the prevalence of infanticide as a mechanism regulating polar bear populations.

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)0.000
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 score0.822
Threshold uncertainty score0.354

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUrsusSame topicMarine animal studies overviewFrench-language works237,207