Cold and hungry: combined effects of low temperature and resource scarcity on an edge‐of‐range temperate primate, the golden snub‐nose monkey
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Both biotic and abiotic factors play important roles in influencing ecological distributions and niche limits. Where biotic and abiotic stressors co‐occur in space and time, homeostatic systems face a scenario in which stressors can compound to impose a challenge that is greater than the sum of the separate factors. We studied the homeostatic strategies of the golden snub‐nosed monkey Rhinopithecus roxellana , a species living in temperate deciduous forests at the edge of the global distribution range for folivorous primates, to cope with the co‐occurrence of cold temperatures and resource scarcity during winter. We discovered that in winter the monkeys experience a dietary energy deficit of 101 kJ mbm −1 d −1 compared with calculated needs, despite increased feeding. This is partly offset by behavioral changes (reduced locomotion and increased resting) and reducing skin temperature by an average of 3.2°C through a cutaneous vasoconstriction to decrease heat loss. However, their major strategy is ingesting surplus energy and accumulating fat reserves when food was not limiting during summer and autumn. Their 14% of body mass lost over the winter represented an energy yield of 102 kJ mbm −1 d −1 , which closely matched the calculated winter energy deficit of 101 kJ mbm −1 d −1 . However, the latter value assumes that all the 75.41 kJ mbm −1 d −1 of protein ingested in winter was available for energy metabolism. This is almost certainly an over‐estimate, suggesting that the study population was in negative energy balance over the study period. Our study therefore suggests that despite its suit of integrated homeostatic responses, the confluence of low temperatures and resource limitation during winter places this edge‐of‐range primate close the threshold of what is energetically viable. It also provides a framework for quantitative models predicting the vulnerability of temperate primates to global change.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".