Reaching New Heights: The Effect of an Environmentally Enhanced Outdoor Enclosure on Gibbons in a Zoo Setting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gibbons have adapted to live in the canopy layer of the rainforest. Gibbons in the wild predominantly spend their time high in the trees resting, traveling, and foraging for food. Comparatively, gibbons in the zoo often rest and search for their food terrestrially. The purpose of this study was to provide these arboreal smaller apes with more opportunities to utilize more vertical space. Six gibbons (4 Nomascus leucogenys and 2 Symphalangus syndactylus) were observed in 2 phases of an observational study. The 1st phase measured space utilization and behaviors of the zoo-housed gibbons in their original outdoor enclosures using instantaneous sampling. The 2nd phase measured the same space usage and behaviors after several modifications were made to the environmental structures in the same outdoor enclosures. A 2-way mixed-model analysis of variance tested the height utilization of the 6 gibbons. The gibbons chose to spend significantly more time outside and at higher heights when the new structures were added. This study shows that given the opportunity, gibbons will exhibit more species-appropriate behaviors.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".