MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2898126676

Leaf-nosed bat species richness (Chiroptera: Phyllostomidae) across habitat types in a neotropical wet forest of the Osa Peninsula, Costa Rica

2018· article· en· W2898126676 on OpenAlexaff
Sara M. Jobson

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBat Biology and Ecology Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpecies richnessEcologySecondary forestGeographyRiparian zoneHabitatRiparian forestPeninsulaVegetation (pathology)Old-growth forestForestryBiology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Neotropical ecosystems are teeming with diversity but unfortunately, many areas are experiencing dramatic levels of degradation. In this study, I compared species richness of Phyllostomidae in secondary, riparian and old growth forest sites to test whether general patterns of diversity applied at the local scale. This study synthesizes data gathered as part of undergraduate field courses that took place between 2013 and 2018 in the Osa peninsula. Much of the study area is early successional secondary forest recovering from agricultural use with remnants of old growth vegetation. Overall, 21 species of Phyllostomidae were identified over 38 nights of sampling. While there were no significant differences in species richness between old growth and secondary forest sites, there were significant difference between these two forest types and riparian habitats. These results highlight the importance of considering surrounding areas when making decisions about the conservation value of specific habitats at the local level. Faculty Mentor: Dr. Doris Audet

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 score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.107

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBat Biology and Ecology Studies→French-language works237,207→