Distribution, Abundance and Conservation Status of Dugong around Koh Talibong, Trang Province, Thailand
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The survey of the dugong population was conducted by using the paramotor between 14 January - 15 March 2008. Altogether 14 dugongs were sighted. The three main feeding grounds were the mouth of river which is the sea-route between Ban Chao Mai and Ban Lang Khao pier. One dugong was sighted in the Koh Talibong area. Another 4 was sighted around the Chu Hoey Cape. The largest number, 9 dugongs were sighted around the Haad Tha Tub and Thung Chin Bay. All the dugongs seemed to be swimming slowly and generally use the gully during the high tide. The dugong sighted in the Koh Talibong area fed mainly on Halophila ovalis. Altogether 25 traces of feeding were found averaging 0.19 meters in width (ranging between 0.15 – 0.25 meters), and 4.47 meters in length (ranging between 2.32. – 6.15 meters). The size of traces left behind averaged at 0.87 sq. meter/trace. The depth of the trace measured from the seabed averaged at 0.15 meter (ranging between 0.08 – 0.20 meter) Since the Koh Talibong is the largest seagrass bed in Thailand and is also the area where the largest number of dugongs were sighted on the Andaman Coast. To protect the resources in this area which is the main feeding ground for dugongs, it is necessary to create awareness of the ecological importance, to foster cooperation with Local Governments and the local fishing communities. It is also recommended that some form of agreements be made between the responsible public agencies and the various group of resource users over delineating of areas to be designated as dugongs and seagrass beds conservation zones that are clearly separate from areas where fishing activities are permitted which should be a modality to ensure adequate protection and sustainability of both seagrass beds and the dugong population.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".