MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3127356583 · doi:10.3390/rs13030458

Drivers of Bornean Orangutan Distribution across a Multiple-Use Tropical Landscape

2021· article· en· W3127356583 on OpenAlexaff
Sol Milne, Julien G. A. Martin, Glen Reynolds, Charles Santhanaraju Vairappan, Eleanor M. Slade, Jedediah F. Brodie, Serge A. Wich, Nicola Williamson, David F. R. P. Burslem

Bibliographic record

VenueRemote Sensing · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransectGeographyHabitatEcologyNest (protein structural motif)Abundance (ecology)ForestryEndangered speciesPongo pygmaeusBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Logging and conversion of tropical forests in Southeast Asia have resulted in the expansion of landscapes containing a mosaic of habitats that may vary in their ability to sustain local biodiversity. However, the complexity of these landscapes makes it difficult to assess abundance and distribution of some species using ground-based surveys alone. Here, we deployed a combination of ground-transects and aerial surveys to determine drivers of the critically endangered Bornean Orangutan (Pongo pygmaeus morio) distribution across a large multiple-use landscape in Sabah, Malaysian Borneo. Ground-transects and aerial surveys using drones were conducted for orangutan nests and hemi-epiphytic strangler fig trees (Ficus spp.) (an important food resource) in 48 survey areas across 76 km2, within a study landscape of 261 km2. Orangutan nest count data were fitted to models accounting for variation in land use, above-ground carbon density (ACD, a surrogate for forest quality), strangler fig density, and elevation (between 117 and 675 m). Orangutan nest counts were significantly higher in all land uses possessing natural forest cover, regardless of degradation status, than in monoculture plantations. Within these natural forests, nest counts increased with higher ACD and strangler fig density, but not with elevation. In logged forest (ACD 14–150 Mg ha−1), strangler fig density had a significant, positive relationship with orangutan nest counts, but this relationship disappeared in a forest with higher carbon content (ACD 150–209 Mg ha−1). Based on an area-to-area comparison, orangutan nest counts from ground transects were higher than from counts derived from aerial surveys, but this did not constitute a statistically significant difference. Although the difference in nest counts was not significantly different, this analysis indicates that both methods under-sample the total number of nests present within a given area. Aerial surveys are, therefore, a useful method for assessing the orangutan habitat use over large areas. However, the under-estimation of nest counts by both methods suggests that a small number of ground surveys should be retained in future surveys using this technique, particularly in areas with dense understory vegetation. This study shows that even highly degraded forests may be a suitable orangutan habitat as long as strangler fig trees remain intact after areas of forest are logged. Enrichment planting of strangler figs may, therefore, be a valuable tool for orangutan conservation in these landscapes.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.076
Threshold uncertainty score0.269

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.219 · 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

Citations17
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRemote SensingSame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207