First Characterization of Nesting Behaviors of Leatherback Turtles (Dermochelys coriacea) and Hawksbill Turtles (Eretmochelys imbricata) in Martinique and Inter-Species Comparison
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sea turtles use specific nesting strategies to maximize the survival of their offspring. Few studies have investigated the nesting behavior of leatherback (Dermochelys coriacea) and hawksbill (Eretmochelys imbricata) turtles. The aim of this study was to characterize the nesting behavior of these two species, taking into account anthropogenic and natural impacts, and to compare behavior between species. Nocturnal monitoring was conducted from 2020 to 2024 on three beaches in Martinique: Madiana, Diamant, and Salines. The average duration of the nesting sequence for leatherback turtles was 101.50 min, with camouflage being the dominant behavior for 27.06% of the total time. For hawksbill turtles, nesting duration was 109.49 min, with digging as the predominant activity (31.68% of total time). No effect of anthropogenic disturbances and obstacles on the behavior of leatherback turtles was observed, while that of hawksbill turtles was significantly influenced by light and the presence of roots. The results revealed behavioral differences between these two species, as well as between two other species: loggerhead (Caretta caretta) and green (Chelonia mydas) turtles. These differences could be explained by morphological differences, nesting habitat peculiarities, beach characteristics, and different evolutionary strategies. Further research is needed to better understand these behaviors and improve conservation efforts.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".