The nutritional importance of invertebrates to female <i>Cebus capucinus imitator</i> in a highly seasonal tropical dry forest
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Invertebrates are important foods for many primates and provide valuable nutrients often unavailable from plant sources. We examine the diet of white-faced capuchins (Cebus capucinus imitator) to determine: (a) timing and types of invertebrate food consumption; (b) whether invertebrate consumption varies with availability of plant foods; and (c) how invertebrates contribute to energy and protein intake of females during different reproductive states. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analyze 2 years of behavioral data from 25 adult female capuchins to determine which invertebrates are eaten. We describe annual and monthly invertebrate consumption patterns, and, employing circular statistics, analyze seasonal consumption of the four most important invertebrate groups eaten. We apply logistic regression analyses to tree density and fruit energy data to determine whether capuchin invertebrate foraging is related to fruit energy availability of their most commonly consumed fruits. We evaluate the nutritional contribution of invertebrates to energetic and protein requirements of females over time and across reproductive stages. RESULTS: Capuchins consumed invertebrates from 21 identifiable groups, but their diet was dominated by four orders: Lepidoptera, Orthoptera, Hemiptera, and Hymenoptera. All four orders were consumed in a significantly seasonal pattern, and reduced fruit energy availability was a significant predictor of increased invertebrate foraging. Capuchin females often required invertebrate energy intake to meet their overall monthly energetic needs, particularly while they were lactating, even though they appear to exceed their protein requirements every month. DISCUSSION: These results indicate that invertebrate consumption is critical for capuchin energetic needs, particularly during periods of reduced fruit availability and lactation.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".