MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4415117952 · doi:10.1038/s41598-025-20568-8

In situ behavioral responses of crustacean zooplankton to an approaching seismic survey

2025· article· en· W4415117952 on OpenAlexaff
Saskia Kühn, Emilie Hernes Vereide, Karen de Jong, Katja Heubel, Anne Christine Utne-Palm

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsImpact
FundersChristian-Albrechts-Universität zu KielConocoPhillips
KeywordsZooplanktonCopepodUnderwaterCrustaceanCalanus finmarchicusPelagic zoneNoise (video)Seismic survey

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The impacts of underwater noise from seismic surveys on zooplankton remain poorly understood despite their critical ecological role. This study investigated the effects of in situ airgun shots on the swimming behavior of the copepod Calanus finmarchicus at distances from over 4000 to less than 100 m from the seismic airgun array (3060 in3, 50.1 L). Copepods were deployed in a cage equipped with a stereo camera system to track individual swimming behavior. Our findings reveal significant changes in swimming speeds and speed-based behavioral classifications: Swimming, Sinking, and Jumping. During airgun exposure, the swimming speed increased significantly, displaying a quadratic relationship around an airgun shot. More copepods jumped, with higher relative jumping counts per individual, following a non-linear relationship with distance from the seismic source. Sinking duration decreased, while swimming lasted longer during shoot periods. Furthermore, our findings suggest that changes in fluid flow speeds and low-frequency sound induced by airgun shots may have driven some of the observed responses, underscoring the complex interaction between seismic activity and copepod behavior. This study not only sheds light on the behavioral effects of impulsive noise on pelagic copepods but also introduces a novel methodology for field research involving small aquatic organisms.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.272 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific Reports→Same topicMarine animal studies overview→French-language works237,207→