MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2909592627 · doi:10.1071/wr18072

The influence of food availability, quality and body size on patch selection of coexisting grazer ungulates in western Serengeti National Park

2019· article· en· W2909592627 on OpenAlexaff
Andrew M. Kittle, Ramadhan Senzota, Hamza Kija, Simon Mduma, John M. Fryxell, Flora J. Magige, Cosmas Mligo, A. R. E. Sinclair

Bibliographic record

VenueWildlife Research · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Guelph
FundersTanzania Wildlife Research InstituteTanzania Commission for Science and Technology
KeywordsUngulateWildebeestBiologyEcologyTransectRange (aeronautics)NicheContext (archaeology)Biomass (ecology)HabitatNational park

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Context Differences in body size and mouth morphologies influence dietary resource separation among savanna ungulates, and this influences their distribution across landscape. Aim The aim was to understand the influence of body size and mouth morphology differences on both diet and patch selection by ungulate species in western Serengeti. Two hypotheses were tested: (1) for ungulate species, the relative body sizes and muzzle widths (mean muzzle width range: 3.1- 9.85) relate directly to food biomass, and to quality of diets selected in the wet season when food is abundant; (2) in the wet season, if food is not limiting, similar-sized species should exhibit greater dietary niche overlap than ungulate species that differ greatly in body size and muzzle width; moreover, similar-sized species exhibit less dietary niche overlap than ungulate species that differ greatly in body size. Methods In the western Serengeti ecosystem, road transects and direct observation were used to obtain data on the distribution and diet of five ungulate species namely buffalo, zebra, wildebeest, topi and impala; which have of varying sizes (range: 70–630 kg) feeding in three different vegetation types. Grassland biomass, structure, nutrient content and ungulate use were measured at sites along transects. Key Results Results indicated that large-bodied ungulates utilised patches of greater food abundance compared with those of smaller ungulates. Body mass was also negatively correlated with diet quality, so that smaller animals ate higher protein and lower-fibre foods, as predicted. Diet niche overlap (niche similarity) showed a strong positive relationship with body mass differences among ungulate species, in support of the second of the two predictions from this hypothesis, namely that dissimilarly sized species could eat the same food. Conclusion Overall, the results suggest that in this savanna system, variation in ungulate body size influences resource separation even in the food-abundant wet season, and that this helps multiple species to co-exist. Implications Implementing more focused conservation strategies will improve wildlife habitat quality by integrating fire as a forage management tool with grazing preferences to promote forage heterogeneity in protected areas.

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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.298 · 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

Citations17
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWildlife ResearchSame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207