Long Distance Seed Dispersal by Forest Elephants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
By dispersing seeds long distances, large, fruit-eating animals influence plant population spread and community dynamics. After fruit consumption, animal gut passage time and movement determine seed dispersal patterns and distances. These, in turn, are influenced by extrinsic, environmental variables and intrinsic, individual-level variables. We simulated seed dispersal by forest elephants ( Loxodonta cyclotis ) by integrating gut passage data from wild elephants with movement data from 96 individuals. On average, elephants dispersed seeds 5.3 km, with 89% of seeds dispersed farther than 1 km. The longest simulated seed dispersal distance was 101 km, with an average maximum dispersal distance of 40.1 km. Seed dispersal distances varied among national parks, perhaps due to unmeasured environmental differences such as habitat heterogeneity and configuration, but not with human disturbance or habitat openness. On average, male elephants dispersed seeds farther than females. Elephant behavioral traits strongly influenced dispersal distances, with bold, exploratory elephants dispersing seeds 1.1 km farther than shy, idler elephants. Protection of forest elephants, particularly males and highly mobile, exploratory individuals, is critical to maintaining long distance seed dispersal services that shape plant communities and tropical forest habitat.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".