MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4403678933 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0309517

Multiphasic movement and step-selection patterns of dispersed tigers in the central Indian landscape

2024· article· en· W4403678933 on OpenAlexaff
Supratim Dutta, Ramesh Krishnamurthy

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNorthwest Regional Development Agency
KeywordsBiological dispersalEcologyHabitatGeographyVegetation (pathology)Land coverSelection (genetic algorithm)Disturbance (geology)Range (aeronautics)Home rangeHabitat destructionBiologyLand usePopulationDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Large carnivores play a crucial role in the ecosystem, though their conservation needs a landscape-level approach due to their wide range of habitats and dispersal events. The study of tigers in a human-dominated landscape matrix and their adaptation and adjustment of movement behaviours during the dispersal phase is essential for long-term conservation planning and management policy. We studied the dispersal event of five VHF/GPS collared individuals during 2009-2020. We investigated movement parameters (step length), and the effects of anthropogenic pressures (distance from village), distance from water and vegetation cover, on behavioural phase under a Hidden Markov Model framework. We also tested the effects of distance from village, vegetation cover, and habitat types on animal movement using an integrated Step Selection Function framework. The mean step length (405.44±10.63 m/hr) varied widely by different time of day. Displacement was high during the night (665.28±21.36 m/hr) compared to day (434.16±17.37 m/hr). Tigers moved fast (872.7m; 95% CI 839.1-906.3m) with longer step length and a directional turning angle in non-forested areas (i.e. the human-dominated landscape), likely to avoid conflict with humans. Individuals distinctly exhibited two behavioural states: encamping (~32% of the time) and travelling (~68% of the time). Further, they avoided the human-dominated landscape and mostly remained in and forested areas, especially during nighttime. Our study is the first attempt to understand behavioural transition of dispersal tigers and their habitat selection. Lesser anthropogenic disturbance and high vegetation cover positively influenced the tiger dispersal, while water availability did not affect their state transitional probability. Additionally, dispersers showed high affinity towards forested land during nighttime for travelling.The findings of this study show the importance of functional corridors and stepping stones (mostly encamping areas), and also provide baseline knowledge for integrated landscape management planning and policymaking for the long-term survival of tigers in metapopulation framework.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.181 · 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONE→Same topicWildlife Ecology and Conservation→French-language works237,207→