Ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) Attracted to Rabbit Carcasses in Three Different Habitats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study reports the ant species that were attracted to rabbit carcasses in three different habitats (agricultural, desert, urban) in the city of Riyadh, Saudi Arabia from May to July 2014. Rabbit carcasses were used as a model for decomposition. Carcasses were categorized as exposed, clothed, shaded and burnt. A total of 726 ants belonging to three subfamilies and 14 species were collected during the decomposition process. Trichomyrmex mayri (Forel) was the only ant species attracted to the carcasses placed in the desert site. At the agricultural site, there was one ponerine species, five formicine species, and three myrmicine species were attracted, while at the urban site, five formicine species and one myrmicine species were recorded. The agricultural site attracted the highest number of ants. In contrast, the desert site attracted the lowest number of ants. Tr. mayri was the most prevalent species occurring in both the agricultural and desert sites. The bloated stage of decomposition attracted the highest number of ants followed by the decay, fresh and dry stages, respectively. Clothed carcasses attracted the highest number of ants followed by the exposed and burnt carcasses, respectively. The shaded carcasses attracted the fewest number of ants. This study found that ants are attracted to carcasses at all stages of decomposition and are common components of the necrofauna of central Saudi Arabia.
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".