Porcupine (<i>Coendou</i> spp.) geophagy in an Amazonian landscape of fear
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Neotropical porcupines (Coendou spp.) remain poorly studied, with much of our knowledge derived from anecdotal observations or research on captive individuals. In this study, we used camera traps across multiple survey designs – an arboreal grid, a terrestrial grid, and at mineral licks – to investigate habitat use and geophagy in sympatric porcupine species in southeastern Peru. We obtained a total survey effort of 70,863 trap-nights, during which we collected 1,956 camera-trap photos and videos belonging to 526 independent events of Coendou bicolor, Coendou longicaudatus, and Coendou ichillus. Our results provide a detailed account of geophagy in C. bicolor and C. longicaudatus. We also used relative abundance indices (RAIs) to assess habitat use in these species with results showing a relatively high RAI for C. ichillus in the canopy (35.56 independent events per 1,000 trap-nights), as well as for C. bicolor and C. longicaudatus at mineral licks on ground level (97.82 and 41.16, respectively). By identifying these habitat preferences through camera trap data, we provide key insights for future research, while also expanding our knowledge on the ecology of these elusive species.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".