Ursus maritimus
Enable an AI agent to recognise Ursus maritimus, interpret evidence about its individuals and populations, and support habitat protection, monitoring and authorised management.
Bundle → Layer → Finding → Questions Filled
7 bundles · 13 layers · 20 findings · 32 questions
Polar bear identity Establish the taxon and evaluate whether evidence belongs to it.
Taxonomic anchor
Resolve the scientific name and provider records.
Accepted species concept
Record the accepted binomial, authority, placement and versioned external identifiers; retain unresolved provider discrepancies.
- Which taxonomic authority supports Ursus maritimus Phipps, 1774 and its placement within Ursidae? provenance
- Which accepted GBIF record corresponds to NCBI Taxonomy 29073, and which checklist version establishes that mapping? boundary
Field identification
Assess observations against other bears and possible hybrids.
Identification confidence
Combine diagnostic morphology, location and evidence quality without treating pale fur as decisive.
- Which visible head, neck, ear and paw features support polar bear identification over a pale brown bear? measurement
- What conflicting evidence would require expert or genetic review for possible hybrid ancestry? action
Life history and condition Interpret a bear's state through sex, development and maternal dependency.
Demographic condition
Separate life stage and sex from measurements of condition.
Contextual body assessment
Record sex, age evidence, dependency, mass and condition with methods suitable for comparison.
- How were sex, age class and independence from the mother established? provenance
- Does the condition comparison account for sexual size dimorphism, reproductive state and season? measurement
Maternal cycle
Track reproductive evidence, denning and dependent young.
Maternity and cub dependency
Represent maternity denning separately from general shelter use and record cub outcomes over time. [USFWS species account](https://www.fws.gov/species/polar-bear-ursus-maritimus)
- What evidence distinguishes an occupied maternity den from a suspected den or temporary shelter? boundary
- When were cub number, dependency and subsequent survival observed, and which outcomes remain unknown? measurement
Arctic habitat and movement Connect seasonal locations to usable ice, land and denning habitat.
Seasonal ice access
Evaluate sea ice as accessible habitat rather than total regional ice cover.
Usable hunting habitat
Specify how local ice conditions, timing and movement determine access to hunting areas.
- Which ice conditions count as accessible hunting habitat for this location and season? definition
- How do breakup, freeze-up and distance to usable ice change the bear's access over the observation period? measurement
Land and denning areas
Interpret terrestrial occurrences within seasonal movement and reproduction.
Terrestrial use context
Distinguish seasonal land use, transit and denning from unsupported conclusions about displacement.
- Does the terrestrial occurrence represent seasonal residence, transit, denning or an unresolved use? boundary
- Which dated observations establish connections between this area, feeding habitat and maternity sites? provenance
Feeding and energy balance Assess food acquisition and periods without adequate feeding.
Prey and feeding evidence
Distinguish prey availability, hunting and consumption.
Marine prey access
Prioritise evidence about access to ringed and bearded seals while allowing other observed foods. [USFWS species account](https://www.fws.gov/species/polar-bear-ursus-maritimus)
- Does the record show available prey, an attempted hunt, a kill or confirmed consumption? boundary
- Which prey and feeding observations support an estimate of intake rather than presence alone? measurement
Fasting and reserves
Relate feeding interruptions to condition without inventing universal thresholds.
Energetic stress evidence
Separate observed condition change from inferred fasting duration and modelled energy deficit.
- What evidence bounds the duration of limited feeding, and how does body condition change during it? measurement
- What evidence shows whether terrestrial food or scavenging materially offsets reduced seal access for this demographic group? provenance
Population and conservation Interpret abundance, demographic change and extinction-risk assessments at their proper scales.
Population evidence
Attach estimates to explicit boundaries, periods and methods.
Comparable population estimates
Distinguish biological populations from administrative units and preserve uncertainty in estimated change.
- Which boundary version and movement evidence define the population or management unit being assessed? boundary
- Are abundance, survival and recruitment estimates comparable in survey method, coverage and observation period? measurement
Risk and threat attribution
Keep dated conservation classifications separate from causal evidence and forecasts.
Assessment scope and drivers
Use the verified 2015 Vulnerable assessment as a dated baseline; represent sea-ice-loss projections with their assumptions and uncertainty. [IUCN Polar Bear Specialist Group](https://www.iucn-pbsg.org/iucn-redlist/)
- Which assessment date, geographic scope and criteria support the reported conservation category? provenance
- Which local effects of ice loss, removals, contaminants or disturbance are measured, inferred or projected? boundary
Human interaction and management Support accountable decisions where people, infrastructure and polar bears interact.
Encounter context
Describe behaviour, attractants and maternal context before selecting a response.
Encounter triage
Record observable encounter conditions without equating proximity with aggression or assuming habituation.
- What behaviour, distance, food attractants and presence of cubs or a den were actually observed? measurement
- Which local response authority and current encounter protocol apply to this location? action
Authorised monitoring and intervention
Link proposed actions to their permissions, evidence and likely effects.
Action eligibility
Assess observation, sampling, tagging, deterrence or relocation separately, with jurisdiction, Indigenous rights and maternal risks explicitly considered.
- Which permissions, responsible organisations and applicable Indigenous governance arrangements govern the proposed action? action
- What evidence supports the action's benefit, and how will effects on the bear, dependent cubs and nearby people be evaluated? action
Evidence and external alignment What the world already says about this thing, gathered so the model can be checked against it.
Reported evidence
Findings from the breadth pass, kept separate from the structural claims.
Check these first
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- Which of these check these first hold for the sense of Ursus maritimus this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Identifiers and schemes
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- Which of these identifiers and schemes hold for the sense of Ursus maritimus this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Standards and regulation
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- Which of these standards and regulation hold for the sense of Ursus maritimus this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Real-world use
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- Which of these real-world use hold for the sense of Ursus maritimus this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Typical measurements
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- Which of these typical measurements hold for the sense of Ursus maritimus this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Failure modes and hazards
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- Which of these failure modes and hazards hold for the sense of Ursus maritimus this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Regional variation
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- Which of these regional variation hold for the sense of Ursus maritimus this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart
Recalled without web access and unsourced; every item is a lead to verify.
- Which of these neighbouring kinds and how to tell them apart hold for the sense of Ursus maritimus this model covers, and on what evidence? provenance
Classifiers Filled
- Family
- Thing Registry
- Category
- Physical world and living systems
- Entry kind
- thing
- Plane
- PHY
- Domain
- PHY.LIV
What it is Filled
Ursus maritimus Phipps, 1774, the polar bear, is a species of large carnivorous mammal in the family Ursidae, native to the circumpolar Arctic and adapted to hunting seals on sea ice.
In scope
- Taxonomic identity, authority, external identifiers and identification uncertainty
- Individual life stage, sex, reproductive state and body condition
- Arctic distribution, seasonal movement, sea-ice access and maternity habitat
- Feeding opportunities, fasting exposure and relationships with prey
- Population evidence, conservation assessments and human interactions
Out of scope
- General bear biology owned by broader Ursidae or Ursus models
- Brown bears and hybrid taxa as independent taxonomic subjects
- Sea-ice physics and climate simulation methods
- Seal species biology beyond polar bear prey relationships
- Meat, hides, trophies and other derived products
- Veterinary treatment protocols and wildlife legislation as independent bodies of knowledge
Why it exists Filled
Enable an AI agent to recognise Ursus maritimus, interpret evidence about its individuals and populations, and support habitat protection, monitoring and authorised management.
Distinguishing features Filled
- Assess the combination of elongated neck, relatively small rounded ears, head profile and broad paws against brown-bear alternatives; pale fur alone is insufficient.
- Check whether a wild occurrence is consistent with Arctic distribution; an Antarctic location demands correction or evidence of captivity or transport.
- Use sea-ice-associated seal hunting as ecological support for identification, without excluding bears observed ashore or eating other foods.
- Flag suspected polar bear-brown bear hybrids for expert assessment and appropriate genetic evidence rather than forcing identification from coat colour.
- Separate an assertion about the species from a sighting of one bear or an estimate for a geographically bounded population.
What robots and AI may and may not do Filled
Must not
- Approach, feed, bait or harass a polar bear.
- Assist in hunting or trading polar bears or their parts outside lawful quotas.
- Share real-time locations of bears in a way that invites disturbance.
- Present a bear as harmless or tame.
Only with a human decision
- Any decision to deter, relocate or kill a bear near people.
May
- Identify polar bears from images or sightings and report them to wildlife authorities.
- Report sighting and conservation data from official sources.
- Warn people in polar bear areas to follow local safety guidance.
Moral aspects Filled
- Polar bears depend on sea ice that is shrinking with climate change.
- Encounters can be fatal for both people and bears.
Who is affected
- Polar bears
- Arctic communities
- Visitors and researchers
Owners Filled
Steward
Nobody: wild and protected by law; Arctic states manage them under international agreement.
Master systems
- IUCN Red List
- National wildlife management databases
Links to other meta-models Filled
parent
- Q30090244 - registry parent class
What else AI and robots need to interact with it Filled
Identity and identifiers required Filled
- Vercy registry: vr.tr.ursus-maritimus
- Wikidata: Q33609 (https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q33609)
Direct properties required Filled
- Taxonomic identity: Ursus maritimus Phipps, 1774; species; genus Ursus; family Ursidae
- External taxonomy linkage: NCBI Taxonomy: 29073; GBIF accepted identifier and checklist version require reconciliation
- Biological subject level: Species; population; management unit; individual; observation
- Sex and life stage: Sex: female, male, undetermined; stage: dependent cub, independent immature, adult, undetermined
- Body mass and condition: Mass in kg; body-condition score with named protocol; date, sex, life stage and uncertainty
- Reproductive and denning state: Pregnancy suspected or confirmed; maternity denning; accompanying dependent cubs; other; unknown
- Native range and occurrence context: Circumpolar Arctic, including Canada, Greenland, Norway, Russia and the United States; dated location and wild or captive context
- Seasonal sea-ice access: Accessible ice days per season; distance to suitable ice in km; habitat definition and observation interval
- Population abundance and trend: Estimated individuals with uncertainty interval; trend over a stated period; geographic boundary and method
- Dated global conservation assessment: Verified baseline: IUCN Vulnerable, assessment year 2015; retain assessment source and check for supersession
Recognition required Filled
- Large white or cream bear with a long neck and black nose, on sea ice or Arctic coasts.
Capabilities and actions required Filled
- Evaluate a sighting or specimen identification and retain unresolved brown-bear or hybrid alternatives.
- Associate individual observations with dated population boundaries without assuming permanent membership.
- Compare body condition, reproduction and abundance only across compatible methods and demographic groups.
- Identify seasonal feeding access and maternity habitat that require closer monitoring or protection review.
- Route encounters, injured bears and suspected den disturbance to the relevant wildlife authority.
- Determine which jurisdictional permissions and evidence must be checked before proposed monitoring or intervention.
Hazards and failure modes required Filled
- Attacks on people who come close.
- Population decline as sea ice is lost.
Standards and interfaces required Filled
- Agreement on the Conservation of Polar Bears, 1973, between the five range states.
- Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES), Appendix II.
Context of use required Filled
- Polar bears occur across the circumpolar Arctic, especially in sea ice habitats and adjacent coastal areas.
- They are encountered in wildlife monitoring, ecological research and conservation planning concerned with sea ice dependence and marine food webs.
- Their presence also informs community planning and management of encounters between people and large predators.
Sources Filled
- Wikidata item Q33609: Ursus maritimus - identity and sense of the item
- Wikipedia: Polar bear - general description of the item
Open questions
- Which accepted GBIF identifier and checklist release should be linked to the registry, given differing authority strings and records returned by providers?
- Has a published global IUCN assessment superseded the verified 2015 assessment, and which dated source establishes the latest status?
- Which current population boundaries and naming authority should the model use, and how should disputed or changing units be represented?
- Which validated, region-specific condition and fasting measures support management decisions across sexes, ages and reproductive states?
- What identification evidence is sufficient for suspected hybrids, and which local governance rules control intervention and access to sensitive den or community-held observations?
Machine files
Provenance
thing registry research (pass 2) · unreviewed
Built from: models/things/publications/thing-q33609/spec.json