Body mass and growth rates in captive chimpanzees (<i>Pan troglodytes</i>) cared for in African wildlife sanctuaries, zoological institutions, and research facilities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Captive chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) mature earlier in body mass and have a greater growth rate compared to wild individuals. However, relatively little is known about how growth parameters compare between chimpanzees living in different captive environments. To investigate, body mass was measured in 298 African sanctuary chimpanzees and was acquired from 1030 zoological and 442 research chimpanzees, using data repositories. An analysis of covariance, adjusting for age, was performed to assess same-sex body mass differences between adult sanctuary, zoological, and research populations. Piecewise linear regression was performed to estimate sex-specific growth rates and the age at maturation, which were compared between sexes and across populations using extra-sum-of-squares F tests. Adult body mass was greater in the zoological and resarch populations compared to the sanctuary chimpanzees, in both sexes. Male and female sanctuary chimpanzees were estimated to have a slower rate of growth compared with their zoological and research counterparts. Additionally, male sanctuary chimpanzees were estimated to have an older age at maturation for body mass compared with zoological and research males, whereas the age at maturation was similar across female populations. For both the zoological and research populations, the estimated growth rate was greater in males compared to females. Together, these data contribute to current understanding of growth and maturation in this species and suggest marked differences between the growth patterns of chimpanzees living in different captive environments.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".