Changes in distribution and range structure of Arctic cephalopods due to climatic changes of the last decades
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The warming of Arctic waters over the last decades has been confirmed by the results of numerous studies. New data on distribution of cephalopods in the Arctic were obtained from the research cruises of PINRO (Russia) and IMR (Norway) during 2006-2011. Teuthowenia megalops and Todaropsis eblanae were found in the Arctic for the first time, at distances of more than 1000 km and 2500 km outside of their ranges, respectively. The demersal species T. eblanae inhabiting the lower shelf and upper continental slope has presumably spread into the Barents Sea by the eastern branch of the Norwegian Current, and further by the southern branch of the North Cape coastal current, as far as the Murman shelf. The bathypelagic species T. megalops is carried to the Arctic evidently by the deep-water warm Atlantic Currents. The new spreading areas of both species are obviously the non-reproductive zones of their ranges. Foraging shoals of Todarodes sagitatus were recorded in the Arctic in 2010 for the first time in the last 25 years, which can be related to not only the warming of Arctic waters, but also the fluctuation of Todarodes levels in the main part of the range in the Northern Atlantic. The native Arctic species Gonatus fabricii has expanded its range to the eastern part of the Barents Sea and to the adjacent part of the Kara Sea. In these areas of Arctic waters, warming is particularly noticeable and the ongoing climatic changes are leading to boreal cephalopods spreading into the Polar Basin. This may impact species relations in vulnerable Arctic ecosystems. © 2013 Copyright Taylor and Francis Group, LLC.
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".