MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283029513 · doi:10.3389/fcosc.2022.850309

Spatio-Temporal Patterns and Source-Dispersion Modeling Towards Sloth Bear–Human Conflict Management in Central India

2022· article· en· W4283029513 on OpenAlex
Sankarshan Chaudhuri, Meghna Bandyopadhyay, Rajasekar Rajaraman, Kalyanasundaram Sankar, Sambandam Sathyakumar, Ramesh Krishnamurthy

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

VenueFrontiers in Conservation Science · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSlothWildlifeGeographyEcologyOccupancyHuman–wildlife conflictBiodiversityContext (archaeology)BiologyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The impact of humans on biodiversity, in the form of the spatially extensive occurrence of humans and subsequent habitat degradation, leads to negative interactions between humans and native wildlife. However, knowledge of the spatial and temporal interface between humans and wildlife is necessary to understand the root cause of such negative interactions, yet considerably understudied in the context of human-dominated landscapes in south and south-eastern Asia. We took this opportunity, gaining insights on seasonal spatial interaction and spatio-temporal overlap between sloth bears ( Melursus ursinus ) and humans, and subsequently predicted the conflict source sites and dispersion (i.e., hotspots) based on the robust geographic profiling (GP) method in the Sanjay Tiger Reserve (STR), a human-dominated landscape of central India. Detection data of sloth bear and human were obtained from camera trap survey conducted for two years (2017–2018) and records of conflict incidents (2009–2019) were collected from forest department. We found that sloth bears can co-occur with humans independently of seasons, based on occupancy models. However, during summer, higher temporal overlap (Δ 4 = 0.46) and lower spatial overlap (0.31) were observed between sloth bears and humans. Contrastingly, lower temporal overlap (Δ 4 = 0.29) and higher spatial overlap (0.44) were observed between the same two during winter. The activity patterns of sloth bears and humans differed significantly across seasons and within the same species in different seasons. Our findings indicated that significant changes in human activity, especially during summer, increased the likelihood of sloth bear-human interaction and subsequent conflict incidents. The mapping of conflict source and dispersion (with high accuracy) also predicted a greater probability of conflict during summer, compared to winter, and thus showed the successful application of GP models in this field. Also, camera trap data alone were able to predict the occurrence of hotspots, demonstrating the use of camera trap records in the successful prediction of source-dispersion of conflict. This study would be useful for decision-makers to alleviate sloth bear–human conflict based on insights on seasonal variation of spatio-temporal overlap between the two and direct conservation efforts accordingly.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.237
Threshold uncertainty score0.570

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.220 · 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