Mammalian Diet and Broad Hunting Strategy of the Dingo (Canis familiaris dingo) in the Wet Tropical Rain Forests of Northeastern Australia<sup>1</sup>
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT The diet of dingoes ( Canis familiaris dingo ) in the Australian Wet Tropics was examined by analyzing 383 dingo scats collected throughout the region for the presence of mammal prey remains. The scats yielded 29 native and 4 introduced mammal prey species from 14 families. The most important species in terms of percentage occurrence in the scats were Melomys cervinipes (22.2%), hoodon macrourus (17.0%), Perameles nasuta (12.5%), and Thylogale stigmatica (12.5%). The most important families were Muridae (37.1%), Peramelidae (29.5%), and Macropodidae (25.8%). Examination of small‐scale habitat preferences revealed species that preferentially use the forest edge ranked significantly higher in the diet than those that do not, and species that are terrestrial ranked higher in the diet than those that are arboreal. Relative abundance was also a significant factor in the ranked dietary occurrence of each species, with abundant species ranked significantly higher than those that are less abundant. These results suggest that dingoes in the Australian Wet Tropics are opportunistic predators of a wide variety of mammal species, with abundant terrestrial and forest edge‐dwelling taxa the most susceptible to predation.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 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 it