An evaluation of site selection methods in the Assiniboine Delta region of Manitoba
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Resources that are devoted to the conservation of biodiversity are limited. Conservation planners are often faced with the challenge of preserving the maximum amount of biodiversity within a give minimum amount of land. Based on these circumstances, the extent to which protected areas are capable of representing elements of biodiversity will largely depend on the manner in which protected areas are selected and where they are located. This thesis focuses on the application of systematic selection methods in order to identify potential networks of protected areas that comprehensively represent enduring landscape features. Two conservation scenarios are explored: one takes into consideration the current level of conservation within the Assiniboine Delta region of Manitoba, and the other treats the study area as if no protected areas have been previously established within the region. A greedy heuristic algorithm and a simulated annealing algorithm were utilized to select candidate areas for conservation that would fulfill specific conservation goals. The two algorithms were free to select sites from crown lands or a combination of crown lands and privately owned natural lands. Variations in the magnitude of spatial clustering and conservation targets were applied to the two algorithms as they selected candidate areas for the two conservation scenarios. The simulated annealing algorithm outperformed the greedy heuristic algorithm with regards to generating a selection set that was spatially compact, and was much closer at meeting conservation goals in the most efficient manner. The results generated from this analysis contained some important implications for conservation planning in the Assiniboine Delta region. Most importantly, efficient ecosystem representation could not be achieved for this region. The reasons for this were that, first, in order to achieve full ecosystem representation, a much larger land base would be required than was available. Second, the presence of existing protected areas reduced the efficiency with which a network of protected areas could be established. The reason for this was that the manner in which the protected areas have been previously established resulted in the over representation of conservation features. Third, the manner in which the planning units were spatially distributed across the landscape did not adequateiy sample all of the enduring landscape features. If full ecosystem representation based on enduring landscape features is going to be accomplished, not only would conservation planners have to look outside crown lands to include privately owned lands, but they would also have to examine the options of restoration and rehabilitation.
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 distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».