MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Forest landscape pattern in the KwaZulu–Natal midlands, South Africa: 50 years of change or stasis?

2004· article· en· W2114480253 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAustral Ecology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
Canadian institutionsCascades (Canada)
FundersNational Research Foundation
KeywordsGeographyHabitatOld-growth forestEcologyArchipelagoGrasslandHabitat destructionLandscape ecologyAgroforestryForestryEnvironmental scienceBiologyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Understanding patterns and processes of habitat change is essential for managing and conserving forest fragments in anthropogenically altered landscapes. Digitized aerial photographs from 1944 and 1996 were examined for changes to the indigenous forest landscape in the Karkloof‐Balgowan archipelago in KwaZulu–Natal, South Africa. Attributes relating to proximate land‐use, patch shape, isolation and position in the landscape were used to determine putative causes of forest change. The total change in forest area was −5.7% (forest covered 6739 ha in 1996). This is contrasted with previous reports for the period 1880–1940 that estimated change in total forest area of up to −80%. Attrition was the predominant process of forest transformation between 1944 and 1996. Despite little overall change in forest area, 786 mostly small (<0.5 ha) forest patches were lost from the landscape, leaving 1277 forest patches in 1996. An increase in patch isolation, but no change in patch cohesion accompanied the changes in forest area. Ignoring patches that were eliminated, 514 patches decreased in area. This was partly a function of patch size, but the conversion of natural grassland to commercial plantation forestry in the matrix also influenced forest decline. Their small size and irregular shape caused forest patches in the region to be vulnerable to edge effects. Core area declined in a negative exponential way with increasing edge width and the total area of edge habitat exceeded that of core habitat at an edge width of only 50 m. Nevertheless, total core area decreased by only 2% (65 ha) between 1944 and 1996 because most of the eliminated patches were small and contained no core area. The large Karkloof forest (1649 ha) is a conservation priority for forest interior species, but the ecological role and biodiversity value of small forest patches should not be overlooked.

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 score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.972

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.212 · 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