MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1991373813 · doi:10.1080/14888386.2012.700560

The role of the circumarctic forest–tundra ecotone for Arctic biodiversity

2012· article· en· W1991373813 on OpenAlexaffabout
Annika Hofgaard, Karen A. Harper, Elena Golubeva

Bibliographic record

VenueBiodiversity · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicClimate change and permafrost
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTundraEcotoneArcticBiodiversityArctic vegetationGeographyVegetation (pathology)EcologyArctic ecologyTaigaPhysical geographyBorealEnvironmental scienceHabitatForestryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The arctic forest–tundra ecotone (FTE), which links species communities of the boreal forest with those of the arctic tundra, is expected to respond swiftly to climate change with a profound reduction of tundra as the dominating scenario. With its circumarctic expanse and up to several hundred kilometres in width, the zone occupies a large part of the vegetated surface at high latitudes. Relocation and structural changes of the ecotone vegetation will affect not only plant but also animal and other biological diversity. A large number of arctic species are dependent on the FTE in terms of food and habitat during parts of their life cycle or annual migration. In the ‘Arctic Species Trend Index’, developed to provide trends in arctic vertebrates, more than half of the species and data are from the FTE. However, in assessments of arctic biodiversity, only the northernmost tundra-dominated areas of the ecotone are included. This is unfortunate and somewhat problematic since the treed part that serves as a source of seeds for new seedlings and saplings in the tundra-dominated part is excluded. This inconsistency hampers monitoring efficiency and biodiversity conservation efforts. During the International Polar Year, a large international research project on the FTE established numerous sites around the circumpolar north where causes and consequences of vegetation change were analysed. This network of sites and data forms an excellent basis for necessary monitoring of the spatial and temporal complexity of forest encroachment into tundra and its relation to arctic biodiversity.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.089

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.170 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations55
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiodiversitySame topicClimate change and permafrostFrench-language works237,207