MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3111869284 · doi:10.1159/000511974

Mantled Howler Monkeys (Alouatta palliata) in a Costa Rican Forest Fragment Do Not Modify Activity Budgets or Spatial Cohesion in Response to Anthropogenic Edges

2020· article· en· W3111869284 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueFolia Primatologica · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPrimate Behavior and Ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryUniversity of TorontoUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForest fragmentationEcologyPrimateGeographyCohesion (chemistry)Fragmentation (computing)ForestryPhysical geographyBiologyHabitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Forest fragmentation increases forest edge relative to forest interior, with lower vegetation quality common for primates in edge zones. Because most primates live in human-modified tropical forests within 1 km of their edges, it is critical to understand how primates cope with edge effects. Few studies have investigated how primates inhabiting a fragment alter their behaviour across forest edge and interior zones. Here we investigate how anthropogenic edges affect the activity and spatial cohesion of mantled howler monkeys (Alouatta palliata) at the La Suerte Biological Research Station (LSBRS), a Costa Rican forest fragment. We predicted the monkeys would spend greater proportions of their activity budget feeding and resting and a lower proportion travelling in edge compared to forest interior to compensate for lower resource availability in the edge. We also predicted that spatial cohesion would be lower in the edge to mitigate feeding competition. We collected data on activity and spatial cohesion (nearest neighbour distance; number of individuals within 5 m) in forest edge and interior zones via instantaneous sampling of focal animals. Contrary to predictions, the monkeys spent equal proportions of time feeding, resting and travelling in forest edge and interior. Similarly, there were no biologically meaningful differences in the number of individuals or the distance between nearest neighbours in the edge (1.0 individuals; 1.56 m) versus the interior (0.8 individuals; 1.73 m). Our results indicate that A. palliata at LSBRS do not adjust their activity or spatial cohesion patterns in response to anthropogenic edge effects, suggesting that the monkeys here exhibit less behavioural flexibility than A. palliata at some other sites. To develop effective primate conservation plans, it is therefore crucial to study primate species' responses to fragmentation across their geographic range.

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.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient 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 score0.081
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.280 · 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