MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7162031735 · doi:10.82308/32972

Spatial distribution of rorqual whales in the Strait of Jacques Cartier, Gulf of St. Lawrence, Quebec, Canada

2001· dissertation· en· W7162031735 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Thomas Doniol‐Valcroze

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine animal studies overview
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBathymetrySpatial distributionShoreWhalingHabitatSubmarine pipelineSpatial ecologyUpwellingMinke whale

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The spatial distribution of four species of rorqual whales was studied along the north shore of the Gulf of St. Lawrence during the months of June to October from 1989 to 2000. A research effort of 6511 hours at sea yielded 849 sightings of blue whales (Balaenoptera musculus), 5291 of finback whales (Balaenoptera physalus), 3822 of humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae) and 6489 of minke whales (Balaenoptera acutorostrata). Spatial and behavioural data were collected at sea using inflatable boats, and Global Positioning Systems (GPS) were used to obtain accurate positions. These data were plotted and analysed using a Geographic Information System (GIS) to test the hypotheses that patterns of distribution were not random, were associated with bathymetry and reflected specific differences in habitat use. The resulting maps illustrated the clustered distribution of rorqual whales linked to sea-bottom topography, probably associated with areas of local upwelling and increased productivity. Blue and fin whales shared almost the same distribution, humpback whales were found in slightly deeper, offshore waters whereas minke whales were more abundant in shallower waters. Little attention has been given until now to local patterns of distribution in the area and such information can be useful for practical management considerations. The results emphasise the importance of scale in ecological studies of marine mammals and the need for further research using additional oceanographic parameters, in order to better understand habitat selection.

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)0.001
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.222 · 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
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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