The co-distribution of seabirds and their juvenile fish prey in Baffin Bay
Bibliographic record
Abstract
LeBlanc, Mathieu (1) (mathieu.leblanc.10@ulaval.ca), A. Mosbech (2) and L. Fortier (1). (1) Takuvik and Québec-Océan, Department of Biology, Université Laval, Québec, Canada. (2) Department of Bioscience - Arctic Environment, Aarhus University, Roskilde, Denmark. In arctic marine ecosystems, arctic cod (Boreogadus saida), the main pelagic forage fish, plays a key role by transferring energy from the zooplankton to the upper trophic levels, including seabirds. The interactions between fish and seabirds at the sea-ice edge, an environment increasingly common in the warming Arctic, are poorly documented. We test the hypothesis that the abundance and biomass of juvenile fish, especially at the sea-ice edge, influence the distribution and composition of the seabird assemblage. Hydroacoustic data were recorded continuously during the CCGS Amundsen GreenEdge 2016 cruise in southern Baffin Bay, using a hull-mounted EK60 multi-frequency echosounder. Pelagic nets were deployed to document the fish assemblage and to validate the acoustic echoes. Seabird observations during transit periods and seabird sampling in Greenland waters were completed. This study will provide insights in the predator-prey dynamics of seabirds and fish in the Arctic in a context of climate change.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".