Potential effects of climate change on ecosystem distribution in Alberta
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We propose a new and relatively simple modification to extend the utility of bioclimatic envelope models for land-use planning and adaptation under climate change. In our approach, the trajectory of vegetation change is set by a bioclimatic envelope model, but the rate of transition is determined by a disturbance model. We used this new approach to explore potential changes in the distribution of ecosystems in Alberta, Canada, under alternative climate and disturbance scenarios. The disturbance model slowed the rate of ecosystem transition, relative to the raw projections of the bioclimatic envelope model. But even with these transition lags in place, a northward shift of grasslands into much of the existing parkland occurred over the 50 years of our simulation. There was also a conversion of 12%–21% of Alberta’s boreal region to parkland. In addition to aspatial projections, our simulations provide testable predictions about where ecosystem changes as a result of climate change are most likely to be initially observed. We also conducted an investigation of model uncertainty that provides an indication of the robustness of our findings and identifies fruitful avenues for future research.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".