Phyllostomid Bat Occurrence in Successional Stages of Neotropical Dry Forests
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tropical dry forests (TDFs) are highly endangered tropical ecosystems being replaced by a complex mosaic of patches of different successional stages, agricultural fields and pasturelands. In this context, it is urgent to understand how taxa playing critical ecosystem roles respond to habitat modification. Because Phyllostomid bats provide important ecosystem services (e.g. facilitate gene flow among plant populations and promote forest regeneration), in this study we aimed to identify potential patterns on their response to TDF transformation in sites representing four different successional stages (initial, early, intermediate and late) in three Neotropical regions: México, Venezuela and Brazil. We evaluated bat occurrence at the species, ensemble (abundance) and assemblage level (species richness and composition, guild composition). We also evaluated how bat occurrence was modulated by the marked seasonality of TDFs. In general, we found high seasonal and regional specificities in phyllostomid occurrence, driven by specificities at species and guild levels. For example, highest frugivore abundance occurred in the early stage of the moistest TDF, while highest nectarivore abundance occurred in the same stage of the driest TDF. The high regional specificity of phyllostomid responses could arise from: (1) the distinctive environmental conditions of each region, (2) the specific behavior and ecological requirements of the regional bat species, (3) the composition, structure and phenological patterns of plant assemblages in the different stages, and (4) the regional landscape composition and configuration. We conclude that, in tropical seasonal environments, it is imperative to perform long-term studies considering seasonal variations in environmental conditions and plant phenology, as well as the role of landscape attributes. This approach will allow us to identify potential patterns in bat responses to habitat modification, which constitute an invaluable tool for not only bat biodiversity conservation but also for the conservation of the key ecological processes they provide.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".