Malayan porcupines in moonlight: Assessing nocturnal activity patterns, with a review of porcupine distributions in Bangladesh
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many aspects of Hystricidae porcupine ecology in South Asia, including that of the Malayan porcupine ( Hystrix brachyura ), remain poorly studied. Part of this species’ global range falls within Bangladesh, where the presence and distribution of porcupines is generally unclear. In Bangladesh, 2–3 species are thought to occur: the Malayan porcupine, the Asiatic brush-tailed porcupine ( Atherurus macrourus ), and the Indian crested porcupine ( Hystrix indica ). However, the presence of the latter is disputed. In this study, we used camera trapping data from mixed evergreen forests in northeastern Bangladesh and country-wide occurrence records from a literature and media report to clarify current knowledge of porcupine distributions in the country. Our results expand the known distributions of Malayan and Asiatic brush-tailed porcupines in Bangladesh but provide no evidence of the Indian crested porcupine. Additionally, using the camera trapping data, we explore previously unreported aspects of the ecology and activity patterns of Malayan porcupines. We examined their temporal activity against that of Asiatic brush-tailed porcupines, carnivores and anthropogenic stressors, as well as investigated the effect of nighttime illumination on activity patterns. We found that Malayan porcupines are generally more active over winter. However, they consistently reduced their activity levels on brighter nights and avoided full-moon periods as a potential anti-predator mechanism. The species exhibited high temporal overlap with similarly nocturnal Asiatic brush-tailed porcupines and mesocarnivores, but little to no overlap with largely diurnal human activity, livestock or feral dog movements. Considering the limited data available on these porcupine species as well as the growing demand for bushmeat and medicinal products, concerns for porcupine populations in South and Southeast Asia are growing. Improved knowledge is crucial for conservation monitoring and management; therefore, further ecological and threat studies are needed to tackle this knowledge gap and inform conservation plans appropriately.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".