MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2894904760 · doi:10.1139/cjz-2018-0056

The bitter end: primate avoidance of caterpillar-infested trees in a central Amazon flooded forest

2018· article· en· W2894904760 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Allana Ataide Negreiros, Adrian Martin Pohlit, Fabrício Beggiato Baccaro, Héctor H. F. Koolen, Adrian A. Barnett

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Zoology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPrimate Behavior and Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyHerbivoreCaterpillarPrimateAmazon rainforestInvertebrateEcologyLarvaZoology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Animal–plant interactions are often mediated by chemical compounds. It has been widely reported that herbivore damage to plants induces chemical defenses which may then affect subsequent interactions with both invertebrate and vertebrate herbivores. Our study investigated the effects of the interaction between larvae of an unidentified nymphalid butterfly and the tanimbuca tree (Buchenavia ochroprumna Eichl.; Combretaceae) on subsequent folivory by a primate, the golden-backed uacari (Cacajao ouakary (Spix, 1823); Pitheciidae). Primate-feeding observations, records of the extent of nymphalid – B. ochroprumna interactions, and tree distribution occurred in Jaú National Park, Amazonas State, Brazil. The values of Ivlev’s electivity index showed that C. ouakary strongly rejected trees infested by caterpillars (−0.68), whereas non-infested trees were highly selected by them (+0.84). Given this behavior, we suggest that C. ouakary may be deterred by (i) caterpillars, (ii) change in leaf chemical composition induced by caterpillars, or (iii) a combination of both.

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)0.000
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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.262 · 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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of ZoologySame topicPrimate Behavior and EcologyFrench-language works237,207