MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2021421579 · doi:10.1017/s0030605306000019

Decline of <i>Propithecus diadema edwardsi</i> and <i>Varecia variegata variegata</i> (Primates: Lemuridae) in south-east Madagascar

2005· article· en· W2021421579 on OpenAlexafffund
Shawn M. Lehman, Jonah Ratsimbazafy, Andry Rajaonson, Sabine Day

Bibliographic record

VenueOryx · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPrimate Behavior and Ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMargot Marsh Biodiversity FoundationPrimate Conservation
KeywordsLemurGeographyBiological dispersalEndangered speciesRange (aeronautics)EcologyBiologyPopulationHabitatPrimateDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes the results of field surveys for two Endangered lemurs, Milne-Edward's sifaka Propithecus diadema edwardsi and the black and white ruffed lemur Varecia variegata variegata, in the unprotected Fandriana-Marolambo forest corridor in south-east Madagascar. Published range maps show P. d. edwardsi and V. v. variegata present in the corridor, although few surveys have been conducted in this area. A total of 292.9 km of surveys were conducted at eight sites in the corridor but P. d. edwardsi and V. v. variegata were each located at only one site. Absence of these species at other sites may be the combined result of altitudinal and anthropogenic effects. Conservation plans for P. d. edwardsi and V. v. variegata are complicated because gaps in forest cover prevent dispersal of conspecifics from nearby protected areas. Conservation authorities should be cautious in using range maps based on the presumed distribution of lemur species.

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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.266 · 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

Citations25
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOryxSame topicPrimate Behavior and EcologyFrench-language works237,207