MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413285931 · doi:10.1111/mms.70066

Temporal Variability in Call Rates of Weddell ( <scp> <i>Leptonychotes weddellii</i> </scp> ) and Leopard ( <scp> <i>Hydrurga leptonyx</i> </scp> ) Seals Near Davis Station, East Antarctica

2025· article· en· W4413285931 on OpenAlexaff
Emma A. Simmonds, John M. Terhune, Brian Miller, John van den Hoff

Bibliographic record

VenueMarine Mammal Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLeopardBiologyZoologyOceanographyEcologyFisheryGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT We investigated Weddell seal ( Leptonychotes weddellii ) and leopard seal ( Hydrurga leptonyx ) vocalizations using passive acoustic monitoring beneath landfast ice and open water, 5.6 km seaward from Davis Station, East Antarctica. Eight‐minute recordings were manually sampled at 1 h intervals over 24 h every 10 days from 24 July 2021 to 30 January 2022. Call counts for Weddell seals were highest in the winter, lower during the breeding season, and almost absent in the summer. This change coincided with the occurrence of open water over the recording site, a progressive shift in Weddell seal behavior from foraging to aggregating in local fjords for the annual pupping, mating, and molting periods, and an increase in leopard seal—a potential predator—call detection rates. Leopard seal calls were primarily detected in December after the landfast ice broke up. In winter, Weddell seal calling counts were highest at dusk and night, and lowest during the day when the seals may have been feeding. Neither species exhibited a diel calling pattern once there were 24 h of sunlight. Seal locations were associated with the presence and absence of landfast ice, and call detections were influenced by their distances to the recorder.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.091
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.240 · 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.

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMarine Mammal ScienceSame topicMarine animal studies overviewFrench-language works237,207