MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399560981 · doi:10.1111/jzo.13195

The socio‐spatial ecology of giant anteaters in the Brazilian Cerrado

2024· article· en· W4399560981 on OpenAlexafffund
Aimee Chhen, Alessandra Bertassoni, Arnaud Léonard Jean Desbiez, Michael Noonan

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Zoology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsOkanagan University CollegeUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFondation SegréCanada Foundation for Innovation
KeywordsBiologyHome rangeEcologyRange (aeronautics)Behavioral ecologyPopulationEvolutionary ecologySpatial ecologyPopulation ecologyPredationZoologyHabitatDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Movement is a key component of an animal's life history. While there are numerous factors that influence movement, there is an inherent link between a species' social ecology and its movement ecology. Despite this inherent relationship, the socio‐spatial ecology of many species remains unknown, hampering ecological theory and conservation alike. Here, we use fine‐scale GPS location data and continuous‐time stochastic processes to study the socio‐spatial ecology of 23 giant anteaters ( Myrmecophaga tridactyla ) in the Brazilian Cerrado. We found that individuals occupied stable home ranges with a mean area of 5.45 km 2 with males having significantly larger home ranges than females. The average amount of home‐range overlap was low (0.20, n = 121 dyads), with no evidence that giant anteater home ranges were structured based on territorial, mate‐guarding, or other social behaviour. We also identified a total of 2774 encounter events. Interestingly, both female–male and male–male dyads had significantly more encounters than female–female dyads, with two pronounced seasonal peaks in female–male encounters. Though encounters occurred frequently, associations between dyads were generally weak and there was little evidence of any correlated movement (mean amount of total correlation = 0.01). Collectively, these findings suggest giant anteaters are a solitary and largely asocial species that readily share space with conspecifics. Despite their present capacity to share space, the combined pressures of being condensed into smaller areas and decreased food availability due to increased pesticide use may cause behavioural changes radiating throughout the population. Our study provides insight into heretofore unknown aspects of the socio‐spatial ecology of this iconic, but understudied species, as well as crucial information for proactive area‐based management. Ultimately, these findings contribute towards sustainable development while potentially maintaining the ecological integrity of giant anteaters and their habitats.

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 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 score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.409

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of ZoologySame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207