MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3094042624 · doi:10.1038/s41597-020-00701-0

Long-term surveys of age structure in 13 ungulate and one ostrich species in the Serengeti, 1926–2018

2020· article· en· W3094042624 on OpenAlexafffund
Pierre Rogy, A. R. E. Sinclair

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Data · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersZoologische Gesellschaft FrankfurtNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaGovernment of CanadaWildlife Conservation Society
KeywordsUngulateGeographyEcologyBiodiversityJuvenileBiologyHabitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Serengeti ecosystem spans an extensive network of protected areas in Tanzania, eastern Africa, and a UNESCO Wold Heritage Site. It is home to some of the largest animal migrations on the planet. Here, we describe a dataset consisting of the sample counts of three age classes (infant, juvenile and adult) of 13 ungulate and one ostrich species. Sample counts were tallied visually from the ground, or, in some instances, aerial photographs, during a period extending from 1926 to 2018. Observed animals were assigned to age classes based on specific criteria for each species. For nine of the 14 species of this dataset, the number of sampling years is over 30. This resulted in a total of 533 different records of count across age classes. By computing age-class ratios, these data can be used to measure long-term recruitment success at different ages of the tallied species. In particular, the temporal extent of these data allows comparison of patterns to other long-term processes, such as the El Niño-Southern Oscillation (ENSO).

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.185 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific DataSame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207