How effective have national parks in Canada been since their designation at preventing landscape fragmentation?
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Landscape connectivity has become an important focus of Canada’s conservation goals. However, ongoing habitat loss and the break-up of habitat patches change a landscape’s composition and configuration, creating additional barriers for wildlife movement and reducing its connectivity. Canadian national parks are at risk of becoming fragmented from direct and indirect stressors, and of becoming islands of natural habitat that are disconnected from their surrounding ecosystems. This study measured the landscape fragmentation of 43 Canadian national parks and paired control areas at key time-steps throughout their history, including before their designation to present-day. It also studied the divergence of fragmentation levels over time between the parks and their control areas. The Effective Mesh Size metric (meff) with both the CUT and CBC procedures was used to measure fragmentation levels, alongside a Progressive-Change Before-After Control-Impact Paired Series study design. The results demonstrate that overall, park protection across the Canadian National Park System has been somewhat successful in preventing landscape fragmentation within their boundaries, in comparison to unprotected control areas. Half of the parks and control areas had a very small change in fragmentation over time. In 35% of parks, fragmentation levels increased faster than in their control areas, and in 15% of parks, fragmentation levels increased more slowly than in their control areas. Older parks with a long history of human influence on the landscape are more fragmented than their control areas, whereas parks that have been designated more recently have a greater effective mesh size than their associated control areas. The regions with the most successful parks in terms of preventing fragmentation are the Taiga and Hudson. The variety of park sizes in these regions indicates that the size of a national park does not necessarily indicate its fragmentation levels. This study provides insights into trends of landscape fragmentation over a long time-period and relates them to different Parks Canada management strategies throughout the agency’s history. The findings will help inform ecological connectivity programming and can indicate the effectiveness of Canada’s efforts to achieve its conservation goals.
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 | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| 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 ».