MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3126330842 · doi:10.1080/11956860.2021.1872264

Improper garbage management attracts vertebrates in a Thai national park

2021· article· en· W3126330842 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jiraporn Teampanpong

Bibliographic record

VenueEcoscience · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWildlifeCrepuscularForagingThreatened speciesNational parkGarbageGeographyAbundance (ecology)EcologyWildlife managementBiologyNocturnalHabitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This research presents the issue of wildlife access to garbage at dumpsites and suggests appropriate management in Kaeng Krachan National Park in Thailand. I set camera traps at three dumpsites from May 2018 to January 2019 (601 trap nights). I detected 38 wild species and three domesticated species. There were five, 20, and 13 species of reptiles, birds, and mammals, respectively, including the globally vulnerable Malayan sun bear (Helarctos malayanus) and long-tailed macaque (Macaca fascicularis). The most prevalent species were diurnal, followed by nocturnal and then crepuscular. Nine species fed on food waste. Highly abundant species visited the dumpsites more frequently than did less abundant ones. Food waste quantities were correlated with the number of tourists, the species number, total individual animals, and species abundance. The likelihood of animals using dumpsites was dependent on the time of day, the location, the tourist season, and the group of animals. Feeding at dumpsites may change the ecological roles and foraging behaviour of wildlife, which leads to increasing populations and human-wildlife conflict. Proper management is required so that increasing waste from tourism will not negatively affect threatened species.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations9
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcoscienceSame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207