MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3092924561 · doi:10.1002/ece3.6901

Infant cannibalism in wild white‐faced capuchin monkeys

2020· article· en· W3092924561 on OpenAlexafffund
Mari Nishikawa, Nuria Ferrero, Saul E. Cheves, Ronald López, Shoji Kawamura, Linda M. Fedigan, Amanda Melin, Katharine M. Jack

Bibliographic record

VenueEcology and Evolution · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPrimate Behavior and Ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsCannibalismPopulationZoologySniffingBiologyEcologyDemographyAnatomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Cannibalism has been observed in a variety of animal taxa; however, it is relatively uncommon in primates. Thus, we rely heavily on case reports of this behavior to advance our understanding of the contexts under which it occurs. Here, we report the first observation of cannibalism in a group of wild white‐faced capuchin monkeys ( Cebus imitator ). The subject was a dead infant, estimated to be 10 days old, and the probable victim of infanticide. Consumption of the corpse was initiated by a 2‐year‐old male (second cousin of the infant), though it was eventually taken over and monopolized by the group's alpha female (grandaunt of the infant). Although most group members expressed interest in the corpse (sniffing, touching, and threatening it), no others made an attempt to consume it. Given that this is the only observation of cannibalism recorded in over 37 years of study on this population, we consider it to be a rare behavior in this species. This detailed record contributes new data, which, when combined with other reports within and across species and contexts, enables the evaluation of adaptive explanations of cannibalism.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 head0.281
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations14
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcology and EvolutionSame topicPrimate Behavior and EcologyFrench-language works237,207