MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4311705556 · doi:10.7717/peerj.13649

N-mixture model-based estimate of relative abundance of sloth bear (<i>Melursus ursinus</i>) in response to biotic and abiotic factors in a human-dominated landscape of central India

2022· article· en· W4311705556 on OpenAlexaff
Sankarshan Chaudhuri, Rajasekar Rajaraman, Kalyanasundaram Sankar, Sambandam Sathyakumar, Ramesh Krishnamurthy

Bibliographic record

VenuePeerJ · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAbundance (ecology)SlothEcologyPoisson distributionNull modelRelative species abundanceAkaike information criterionAbiotic componentAbundance estimationEnvironmental scienceGeographyPhysical geographyBiologyStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reliable estimation of abundance is a prerequisite for a species’ conservation planning in human-dominated landscapes, especially if the species is elusive and involved in conflicts. As a means of population estimation, the importance of camera traps has been recognized globally, although estimating the abundance of unmarked, cryptic species has always been a challenge to conservation biologists. This study explores the use of the N-mixture model with three probability distributions, i.e., Poisson, negative binomial (NB) and zero-inflated Poisson (ZIP), to estimate the relative abundance of sloth bears (Melursus ursinus) based on a camera trapping exercise in Sanjay Tiger Reserve, Madhya Pradesh from December 2016 to April 2017. We used environmental and anthropogenic covariates to model the variation in the abundance of sloth bears. We also compared null model estimates (mean site abundance) obtained from the N-mixture model to those of the Royle-Nichols abundance-induced heterogeneity model (RN model) to assess the application of similar site-structured models. Models with Poisson distributions produced ecologically realistic and more precise estimates of mean site abundance (λ = 2.60 ± 0.64) compared with other distributions, despite the relatively high Akaike Information Criterion value. Area of mixed and sal forest, the photographic capture rate of humans and distance to the nearest village predicted a higher relative abundance of sloth bears. Mean site abundance estimates of sloth bears obtained from the N-mixture model (Poisson distribution) and the RN model were comparable, indicating the overall utility of these models in this field. However, density estimates of sloth bears based on spatially explicit methods are essential for evaluating the efficacy of the relatively more cost-effective N-mixture model. Compared to commonly used index/encounter-based methods, the N-mixture model equipped with knowledge on governing biotic and abiotic factors provides better relative abundance estimates for a species like the sloth bear. In the absence of absolute abundance estimates, the present study could be insightful for the long-term conservation and management of sloth bears.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations9
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePeerJSame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207