MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4296280697 · doi:10.7717/peerj.13993

Understanding the distribution and fine-scale habitat selection of mesocarnivores along a habitat quality gradient in western Himalaya

2022· article· en· W4296280697 on OpenAlexaff
Meghna Bandyopadhyay, A. Cole Burton, Sandeep Kumar Gupta, Ramesh Krishnamurthy

Bibliographic record

VenuePeerJ · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHabitatEcologyWildlifeGeographyWildlife conservationLeopardEcological nicheWildlife corridorBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Human activities have resulted in a rapid increase of modified habitats in proximity to wildlife habitats in the Himalaya. However, it is crucial to understand the extent to which human habitat modification affects wildlife. Mesocarnivores generally possess broader niches than large carnivores and adapt quickly to human activities. Here, we use a case study in the western Himalaya to test the hypothesis that human disturbance influenced mesocarnivore habitat use. Methods: We used camera trapping and mitochondrial DNA-based species identification from faecal samples to obtain mesocarnivore detections. We then compared the responses of mesocarnivores between an anthropogenic site and a less disturbed park along a contiguous gradient in habitat quality. The non-linear pattern in species-specific habitat selection and factors responsible for space usage around villages was captured using hierarchical generalized additive modelling (HGAM) and non-metric multidimensional scaling (NMDS) ordination. Results: Wildlife occurrences along the gradient varied by species. Leopard cat and red fox were the only terrestrial mesocarnivores that occurred in both anthropogenic site and park. We found a shift in habitat selection from less disturbed habitat in the park to disturbed habitat in anthropogenic site for the species detected in both the habitat types. For instance, red fox showed habitat selection towards high terrain ruggedness (0.5 to 0.7 TRI) and low NDVI (−0.05 to 0.2) in the park but no such specific selection in anthropogenic site. Further, leopard cat showed habitat selection towards moderate slope (20°) and medium NDVI (0.5) in park but no prominent habitat selections in anthropogenic site. The results revealed their constrained behaviour which was further supported by the intensive site usage close to houses, agricultural fields and human trails in villages. Conclusions: Our results indicate shifts in habitat selection and intensive site usage by mesocarnivores in the human-modified habitat. In future, this suggests the possibility of conflict and disease spread affecting both the people and wildlife. Therefore, this study highlights the requisite to test the wildlife responses to rapidly growing human expansions in modified habitats to understand the extent of impact. The management strategies need to have an integrated focus for further expansions of modified habitat and garbage disposal strategies, especially in the human-wildlife interface area.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationallow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationalhigh
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

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

Citations7
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePeerJSame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207