MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Ecosystem management based on natural disturbances: hierarchical context and non‐equilibrium paradigm

2011· article· en· W1562201543 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Applied Ecology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcosystem dynamics and resilience
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceSimon Fraser University
KeywordsDisturbance (geology)Context (archaeology)EcologyEcosystemNatural (archaeology)Environmental resource managementEcosystem managementEnvironmental scienceGeographyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary 1. Maintenance of ecological integrity and biodiversity must be based on well‐grounded principles of disturbance ecology. However, non‐equilibrium aspects of ecosystems, such as unpredictability, instability and stochasticity due to various natural disturbances, have not been satisfactorily integrated into practical application. Failure to acknowledge the dynamic nature of systems will inevitably lead to unexpected changes and unachieved conservation goals. 2. This review discusses non‐equilibrium ecology in terms of natural disturbances and the conservation and management of terrestrial ecosystems and landscapes. 3. Several key components, which require further ecological consideration, are specifically discussed. These include the hierarchical disturbance regime, disturbance legacy, multiple post‐disturbance pathways, climate instability, spatial and temporal variability, and resilience. 4. Natural disturbance regimes are complex and difficult to define. This is because some disturbances can be nested, and they interact with other qualitatively and quantitatively different disturbances, constituting a hierarchy of natural disturbances. Large temporal and spatial perspectives are therefore required to incorporate the hierarchical context of natural disturbance regimes into regional management plans. 5. Conservation managers may often seek some kind of dynamic equilibrium based on protection of species and seral stages from extinction. However, because climate instability interrupts any shift toward an equilibrium, most terrestrial vegetation systems are inherently prone to large environmental changes and diverse disturbances, and thus, are dynamic and non‐equilibrating. 6. Synthesis and applications. Resiliency is the key to conserving ecological integrity via the ability to cope with inevitable changes. As long as ecosystems are resilient and disturbances are natural, we should not impede natural shifts in disturbance regimes and resultant ecosystem changes, even if changes are abrupt and unpredictable and thus have large consequences. If ecological resilience has already been eroded by humans, it is important that resilience should be enhanced by restoring keystone features of vegetation systems to prevent disturbance‐induced undesirable ecosystem degradation.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.174
Threshold uncertainty score0.413

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.186
Teacher spread0.181 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it