MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The ice age ecologist: testing methods for reserve prioritization during the last global warming

2012· article· en· W2127611332 on OpenAlexaff
John W. Williams, Heather M. Kharouba, Sam Veloz, Mark Vellend, J. S. McLachlan, Zhengyu Liu, Bette L. Otto‐Bliesner, Feng He

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Ecology and Biogeography · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSpecies Distribution and Climate Change
Canadian institutionsUniversité de SherbrookeUniversity of British Columbia
FundersUniversity of Notre DameU.S. Department of EnergyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsRanking (information retrieval)Abiotic componentPrioritizationRegressionEcologySelection (genetic algorithm)Environmental scienceBiodiversityClimate changePhysical geographyGeographyBiologyComputer scienceStatisticsMathematicsMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Aim We play the role of an ice age ecologist (IAE) charged with conserving biodiversity during the climate changes accompanying the last deglaciation. We develop reserve‐selection strategies for the IAE and check them against rankings based on modern data. Location Northern and eastern North America. Methods Three reserve‐selection strategies are developed. (1) Abiotic: the IAE uses no information about species–climate relationships, instead maximizing the climatic and geographic dispersion of reserves. (2) Species distribution models (SDMs): the IAE uses boosted‐regression trees calibrated against pollen data and CCSM3 palaeoclimatic simulations from 21 to 15 ka bp to predict modern taxon distributions, then uses these as input to the Z onation reserve‐ranking program. (3) Rank‐and‐regress: regression models are used to identify climatic predictors of zonation rankings. All strategies are assessed against a Z onation ranking based on modern pollen distributions. Analysis units are ecoregions and grid cells. Results The abiotic strategy has a negative or no correlation between predicted and actual rankings. The SDM‐based strategy fares better, with a significantly positive area‐corrected correlation ( r = 0.474, P < 0.001) between predicted and actual rankings. Predictive ability drops when grid cells are the analysis unit ( r = 0.217, P = 0.058). Predictive ability for the rank‐and‐regress strategy is similar to the SDM results. Main conclusions For the IAE, SDMs improve the predictive ability of reserve‐selection strategies. However, predictive ability is limited overall, probably due to shifted realized niches during past no‐analogue climates, new species interactions as species responded individually to climate change, and other environmental changes not included in the model. Twenty‐first‐century conservation planning also faces these challenges, and is further complicated by other anthropogenic impacts. The IAE's limited success does not preclude the use of climate scenarios and niche‐based SDMs when developing adaptation strategies, but suggests that such tools offer at best only a rough guide to identifying possible areas of future conservation value.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations60
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Ecology and BiogeographySame topicSpecies Distribution and Climate ChangeFrench-language works237,207