The call repertoire of humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae) on a Newfoundland foraging ground (2015, 2016) with comparison to a Hawaiian breeding ground (1982, 1982)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Understanding the vocal repertoire of a species can help researchers understand many aspects of its ecology. As acoustic communication is often the most effective form of communication in aquatic environments, many marine mammals rely on vocalizations for various aspects of their lives. Therefore, acoustic studies have become a crucial tool to answer many ecological questions about marine mammals and to inform conservation and management, particularly as marine mammals spend much of their lives underwater, making them difficult to study visually. Humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae) are a highly vocal species for which passive acoustics have been used to extensively study their song, and, to a lesser extent, their calls. Calls have been studied on a small number of foraging grounds and migration routes, but many regions are understudied, for example, northeast Newfoundland. Therefore, the goals of this thesis were to characterize the call repertoire of northeast Newfoundland humpback whales during July-August over two years (2015, 2016), and to identify whether five call types that have been previously described (i.e., swops, droplets, teepees, growls, whups) were present on both the Newfoundland foraging ground in 2015 and on a Hawaiian breeding ground from 1981-82. Twenty-two potential call types in four broad classes were qualitatively identified in the Newfoundland repertoire over the two years, with 12 of the call types qualitatively determined to be present in both years. The five previously described call types appear to be present in both Newfoundland years as well as in the Hawaiian recordings, though some differences in characteristics were present. These findings suggest that the Newfoundland humpback whales have an extensive and possibly stable repertoire as found in other regions. They also suggest that some of the humpback repertoire could be both fixed and innate, which gives clues as to the function of some of the calls and points towards potential candidate calls for global passive acoustic monitoring efforts.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".