Rapid Assessment Program (RAP) Survey of Small Mammals in the Kwamalasamutu Region of Suriname
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In a Rapid Assessment Program (RAP) survey of the Kwamalasamutu region of southern Suriname, 38 species of small mammals were documented including 26 species of bats, 10 species of rats, and two species of opossums.The species diversity and relative abundance of rats at three sites around Kwamalasamutu were the highest recorded in 20 years of mammal surveys throughout Suriname and Guyana by the Royal Ontario Museum.Kutari was the most successful site for rats, indicating a healthy source of prey species for predators such as cats, owls, and snakes.In contrast, Werehpai was the most successful for bats but this was attributable to the well-established trails to the petroglyphs approximately 3.5 km from the river, which functioned as flyways that were more conducive for capture success compared to the other two sites where rudimentary trails were only recently cut.This indicates that bats are relatively tolerant to minor alternations to their habitat.Noteworthy records include two species endemic to the Guiana Shield, a water rat (Neusticomys oyapocki) and a brush-tailed rat (Isothrix sinammariensis), collected at Kutari that represent the first occurrences of these species in Suriname.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.003 | 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".