A keystone predator at risk? Density and distribution of the spotted hyena (Crocuta crocuta) in the Etosha National Park, Namibia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For wildlife management and conservation biology, it is important to be able to estimate the status and distribution of animals and to monitor their population trends. In the Etosha National Park, Namibia, there is a lack of knowledge about numbers and distribution of spotted hyenas ( Crocuta crocuta (Erxleben, 1777)) and factors regulating their population. To estimate hyena density and distribution, tape-recorded vocalizations (call-ups) were performed to attract hyenas in the central and eastern parts of Etosha. Eighty-five adult and subadult hyenas responded to the calls, with most of them responding in an area with high density of migratory ungulates, principally springbok ( Antidorcas marsupialis (Zimmermann, 1780)), wildebeest ( Connochaetes taurinus (Burchell, 1823)), and Burchell’s zebra ( Equus burchelli (Gray, 1824)). These migratory species are the main prey of spotted hyenas in Etosha. There was a strong spatial relationship between hyena density and migratory prey biomass. Based on this mathematical correlation, I estimated 203 ± 79 hyenas, i.e., 2.7 ± 1.1 hyenas/100 km 2 , in the central and eastern parts of Etosha. Applying this correlation to the western part of the park, it was possible to estimate 339 ± 176 spotted hyenas, corresponding to an overall density of 2.1 ± 1.0 hyenas/100 km 2 , in the whole Etosha National Park.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".