The bat fauna of Lamanai, Belize: roosts and trophic roles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Thirty-six of the 70 species of bats known from Belize were recorded from the area around Lamanai, Orange Walk County: two in roosts and 34 in about 680 mist net hours that produced 560 captures. Day roosts used by 35 of the species were located using radio-tracking (Sturnira lilium, Platyrrhinus helleri, Centurio senex and Bauerus dubiaquercus) or general searching for roosts (Rhynchonycteris naso, Saccopteryx bilineata, Saccopteryx leptura, Dicli durus albus, Mimon bennettii, Micronycteris schmidtorum, Carollia brevicauda, Carollia perspicillata and Eptesicus furinalis). Data on the day roosts of 23 other species were determined from the literature. Most species reported from Lamanai (19) roosted in hollows, while others used foliage (6), tents (3), sheltered sites (2), crevices (2), open sites (1), and a few species used more than one type of day roost (hollows and crevices (1); hollows and foliage (1); hollows, foliage and tents (1)). The fauna consisted of 13 aerial foragers, 9 gleaners, 11 fruit/leaf eaters, one trawler, one flower-visitor and one blood-feeder. In day roost use and foraging behaviour, the Lamanai fauna did not differ significantly from that of Paracou, French Guiana, but both these locations differed from the bat fauna of Kruger National Park, South Africa, in foraging behaviour.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".