Seasonal Abundance and Distribution of Cetaceans in a High Traffic Shipping Corridor
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT The recovery of many cetacean species coincides spatially and temporally with intensifying anthropogenic threats. We undertook multi‐year systematic surveys to quantify seasonal abundance and document the distribution of at‐risk cetaceans, which is needed to assess the impacts of increasing human activities in the Canadian portions of the southern Salish Sea and Swiftsure Bank. We completed 21 line‐transect surveys encompassing 5346 km of visual effort from September 2020 to December 2022 and collected 1514 sightings of five cetacean species using distance sampling protocols. Humpback whales, harbor porpoises, and Dall's porpoises were the most sighted species and were present in the area year‐round, with strong seasonal differences in their abundance and distribution. Estimated abundance of humpback whales was lowest in winter at 17 (95% CI: 11–26) and highest in fall at 416 (261–663). Harbor porpoise abundance was also lowest during winter at 606 (366–1006) and highest in fall at 1415 (975–2055). Dall's porpoise abundance was lowest in summer at 65 (38–112) and highest in winter at 333 (224–494). These estimates were not corrected for availability or perception bias; thus, they may underestimate true abundance to some extent. These seasonal patterns in abundance and distribution will inform threat assessment and mitigation for cetaceans in this area of high and increasing vessel traffic.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".