MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1892283422 · doi:10.1002/ajp.22253

Ecosystem impacts of folivory and frugivory by Japanese macaques in two temperate forests in Yakushima

2013· article· en· W1892283422 on OpenAlexaff
Goro Hanya, Mieko Fuse, Shin‐ichiro Aiba, Hino Takafumi, Riyou Tsujino, Naoki Agetsuma, Colin A. Chapman

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Primatology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPrimate Behavior and Ecology
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFrugivoreBiologyMacaquePlant litterEcologyHerbivoreEcosystemLitterHabitatAbundance (ecology)ForagingTemperate forest

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Comparing animal consumption to plant primary production provides a means of assessing an animal's impact on the ecosystem and an evaluation of resource limitation. Here, we compared annual fruit and leaf consumption by Japanese macaques (Macaca fuscata) relative to the annual production of these foods in the lowlands and highlands of Yakushima Island, Japan. We estimated consumption by macaques by the direct observation of macaque groups for 1 year in each habitat. We estimated leaf production as the sum of leaf litter fall (corrected for the effect of translocated organic and inorganic matter) and folivory by insects (assumed to be 10%) and by macaques. We estimated fruit production as the sum of fruit litter fall and consumption by birds (estimated by the seed fall) and macaques. The impact of macaque folivory at the community level was negligible relative to production (∼0.04%) compared with folivory by insects (assumed to be 10%); however, for some species, macaque folivory reached up to 10.1% of production. Tree species on which macaques fed did not decline in abundance over 13 years, suggesting that their folivory did not influence tree species dynamics. For the three major fleshy-fruited species in the highland site, macaques consumed a considerable portion of total fruit production (6-40%), rivaling the consumption by birds (32-75%). We conclude that at the community level, macaque folivory was negligible compared with the leaf production, but frugivory was not.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.785

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.314
Teacher spread0.306 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations8
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of PrimatologySame topicPrimate Behavior and EcologyFrench-language works237,207