MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4405393323 · doi:10.1139/cjz-2024-0106

Classifying southern stingray activity states across abiotic factors in Belize coral reef ecosystems

2024· article· en· W4405393323 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kathryn I. Flowers, Elizabeth A. Babcock, Demian D. Chapman, Norlan F. Lamb, A Miranda, Megan Kelley, Yannis P. Papastamatiou

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCoral and Marine Ecosystems Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEarthwatch InstituteMays Family Foundation
KeywordsBiologyStingrayAbiotic componentCoral reefCoralReefEcosystemEcologyFisheryAtollCoral reef organizationsOceanographyCoral reef protectionGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Elasmobranchs often exhibit nocturnal or crepuscular activity, with shark diel patterns being better understood than ray diel patterns. We used accelerometry and hidden Markov models (HMMs) to classify female southern stingray ( Hypanus americanus Hildebrand & Schroeder, 1928) activity states across diel periods and environmental conditions in Belize. Three state (low, medium, and high activity) HMMs were constructed for all individuals together and separately ( N = 9). Combined, stingrays were most likely to be highly active at night and in low and medium activity states in the morning. However, there was individual variation in diel activity. In contrast, all stingrays consistently used shallow water (<4 m) during periods of high activity. Temperature had less influence on activity patterns, although three individuals exhibited high activity in cooler water. Generally, high stingray activity was driven by diel cycles and depth. Future research should link activity states to specific behaviours, include a larger sample size, extend tag deployment durations, and explore the impact of predator and prey dynamics on stingray activity.

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)0.001
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 score0.349
Threshold uncertainty score0.694

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Zoology→Same topicCoral and Marine Ecosystems Studies→French-language works237,207→