MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7133279055

Grey Seal Abundance in Canadian Waters and Harvest Advice

2023· other· en· W7133279055 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
M. O. Hammill, S. P. Rossi, A. Mosnier, C. E. den Heyer, W. D. Bowen, G. B. Stenson

Bibliographic record

VenueFederal Open Science Repository of Canada / Le Dépôt fédéral de science ouverte du Canada · 2023
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAbundance (ecology)PopulationNova scotiaPopulation modelProduction modelReproductionVital ratesPopulation growthPopulation size
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Here we introduce a new integrated population model (IPM) to provide harvest advice for the Gulf of St. Lawrence (Gulf), Coastal Nova Scotia (CNS) and Sable Island grey seal herds, and compare model outputs with estimates from a deterministic model used in previous assessments. The IPM was fit to the pup production estimates for the Scotian Shelf (CNS and Sable Island combined) and the Gulf. As with the previous assessment model, the new model was fit to both pup production and pregnancy rates, and includes an index for ice-related pup mortality in the Gulf. The new model includes both density-dependent and density-independent pup mortality, and fits to sighting histories of individually marked seals at the breeding colony on Sable Island to estimate sex- and age-specific survival and recruitment to the breeding colony. The model estimated that total pup production increased slightly from 92,300 (95% CI = 86,700–100,100) in 2016 to 99,300 (90,900–107,700) in 2021, while total abundance increased slightly from 339,400 (317,900–361,500) in 2016 to 366,400 (317,800–409,400) in 2021. The rate of growth of the population has continued to slow, declining from approximately 4% during the last assessment period, to 1.5% per year between 2016 and 2021. The updated population estimate from the previously accepted deterministic population model was 363,600 (298,700–450,000) for 2021, which is very similar to the estimate of abundance generated using the IPM. Although the population continues to grow, the current estimate is below that presented during the 2016 assessment. The difference is due to changes in the structure of the new population model and higher estimates of juvenile mortality produced by the model fit to the 2021 pup production estimates. Additional information on juvenile survival and how it responds to changes in abundance (density-dependent) and environmental (density independent) variation is needed as it represents a significant gap to our understanding of the dynamics of this population and of large marine mammals in general. Total allowable removals depend on age structure of the harvest and whether the harvests are conducted in winter at the breeding colonies, or at other times of the year when animals from all herds are mixed. Using an integrated model incorporates many of the inputs in a unified framework that allows for uncertainty to be propagated throughout the analyses.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.147

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.221 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFederal Open Science Repository of Canada / Le Dépôt fédéral de science ouverte du CanadaFrench-language works237,207