MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2102690268 · doi:10.1641/b570917

The Broad View of Landscapes

2007· article· en· W2102690268 sur OpenAlexaff
Mark R. T. Dale

Notice bibliographique

RevueBioScience · 2007
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineEnvironmental Science
ThématiqueWildlife-Road Interactions and Conservation
Établissements canadiensUniversity of Alberta
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésGeography

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Ecosystem Function in Heterogeneous Landscapes. Gary M. Lovett, Clive G. Jones, Monica G. Turner, and Kathleen C. Weathers, eds. Springer, New York, 2005. 489 pp., illus. $59.95 (ISBN 9780387240909 paper). Ecosystem Function in Heterogeneous Landscapes is the product of a Cary conference held at the Institute for Ecosystem Studies in Millbrook, New York, in 2003. Like other edited conference volumes (Likens 1989, Canham et al. 2003, etc.), it is long (489 pages) and broadly based, with the topics of its 24 chapters ranging from the theoretical and the synthetic to applications such as conservation planning. I have to admit a certain prejudice against conference volumes of this sort, which tend to be lengthy and cannot avoid disparities of style and focus. One obvious manifestation of this disparity is the great variation in the number, quality, sophistication, and usefulness of the figures used to illustrate the different chapters. My preference would be a “distilled wisdom” version with half the length of this volume and a synoptic approach that eliminates both repetition and contradiction. Although the jacket blurb hints at a groundbreaking synthesis, the book is more a compilation of current thinking and the present state of research in a number of related fields, including ecosystem science, landscape ecology, and conservation biology. The format, however, makes it difficult to compare chapter material, and it is not easy to follow the thread of a single concept throughout the volume. A flowchart or map of the relationships among the contents of the chapters might have been a useful addition. That said, I commend the editors for their introductions to each section, which identify the common themes in all of the contributions. This is essential, given the broad range of ecosystems under discussion, from freshwater and oceans to cities and forests. The major theoretical component, which the editors emphasize, is the significance of the configuration of landscape elements, not merely the composition of the landscape, for the functioning of these heterogeneous systems: the flows of ecological processes are facilitated or inhibited by the landscape's configuration. Although it is useful to have much of the current thinking on this topic collected in a single volume, I was left with the impression that a lot more thinking still needs to be done. Perhaps the most important challenge for this area of study is to develop conceptual and analytic frameworks that take into account the common elements of the broad range of systems studied. The spatial and temporal heterogeneity of ecological systems “nearly always affects processes and functions in ecosystems, and in diverse ways” (p. 414). The strength of this book is that it presents this diversity comprehensively, but diversity is also the book's weakness, inasmuch as general principles that unify the “diverse ways” are not presented. Also missing from this collection are the theoretical tools needed to facilitate the research, even though these are available elsewhere. The concept of networks is mentioned in more than one chapter (pp. 39–41, 455–456), but it is never fully developed, and its parent concept, graph theory, does not even appear in the index. This is a simple yet powerful body of theory in which spatial units are depicted as points (or nodes or vertices), with the connections and relationships between them depicted as lines (or arcs or edges); the points may have quantitative or qualitative characteristics, and the lines may have directions and other properties, such as rates. Graph theory has already been used in a variety of ecological studies (Dale 1977, Ricotta et al. 2000, Urban and Keitt 2001, Proulx et al. 2005, among many), and the subjects covered in this book would have benefited from its application. Discussions sometimes touch on the ideas of graph theory (for example, in reference to “point” processes at particular locations, with flows of energy, materials, and information between them [figure 2.1]), but it could be argued that the raster-based conceptual model depicted in figures 2.1, 2.2 and 2.3 will overly constrain developments in this area. A more open and flexible conceptual model will be important to the study of the function of heterogeneous landscapes, allowing all of the effects of the mechanisms of configuration, not just compositional differences, to be fully realized. The book's contributors are to be credited for taking on such a difficult and critically important topic. Nonetheless, the current state of research in this field leaves room for considerably more work. I look forward to future developments in this area and to more distillation of the collective wisdom. The effects of spatial heterogeneity cannot be ignored, and they must be accounted for in ways appropriate to the system under study.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Théorique ou conceptuel · Signal consensuel: Théorique ou conceptuel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,009
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,031

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,003
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,000
Bibliométrie0,0020,003
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0030,026
Communication savante0,0090,013
Science ouverte0,0010,003
Intégrité de la recherche0,0030,006
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0090,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,009
Tête enseignante GPT0,241
Écart entre enseignants0,233 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeThéorique ou conceptuel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2007
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentnon

Explorer davantage

Même revueBioScienceMême sujetWildlife-Road Interactions and ConservationTravaux en français237 207