MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Biological Framework for Evaluating Whether a Species Is Threatened or Endangered in a Significant Portion of Its Range

2007· article· en· W2141198754 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Robin S. Waples, P. B. Adams, James A. Bohnsack, Barbara L. Taylor

Bibliographic record

VenueConservation Biology · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicConservation, Ecology, Wildlife Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
KeywordsEndangered speciesThreatened speciesRange (aeronautics)GeographyEcologyTaxonomic rankEnvironmental resource managementBiologyEnvironmental scienceHabitatTaxonEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Under the U.S. Endangered Species Act (ESA), a species can be listed if it is at risk "in all or a significant portion of its range," but the ESA provides no guidance on how to interpret this key phrase. We propose a simple test to determine whether the areas of a species' range in which it is currently at risk amount to a significant portion: If the species were to become extirpated from these areas, at that point would the entire species be at risk? If so, then these areas represent a significant portion of the species' range. By establishing the species itself as the point of reference for determining significance, this test directs attention to biological risk factors and avoids difficulties inherent in subjective evaluations of importance to humans. For broadly distributed species this framework could provide ESA protection due to cumulative risks before the entire species met the criteria to be considered threatened or endangered. This framework also allows a somewhat broader concept of range to include major components of diversity necessary for long-term persistence. The concept of a historical template (i.e., conditions under which the species was known to be viable) is important in providing a fixed reference point for evaluating viability. Empirical examples illustrate how these concepts have been applied in recent ESA listing determinations. Most ESA-listed units of Pacific salmon (Oncorhynchus spp.) can be divided into multiple strata that differ in terms of ecology, geology, or life-history traits of the component populations. The goal of ESA recovery planning is to restore viable populations in enough strata that the listed unit as a whole is no longer threatened or endangered in all or a significant portion of its range. In a recent review of Pacific herring (Clupea pallasii) in Puget Sound, current status (some populations increasing and others declining) was evaluated in the context of the historical template, and it was concluded that current patterns of distribution and abundance do not depart substantially from what would be expected at any point in time under natural conditions in a large metapopulation. The Canadian lynx (Lynx canadensis) is ESA listed in the contiguous United States, where it occurs in four geographic areas. Populations in one region, the Northern Rockies/Cascades, have always been the most important for long-term persistence of the species in the United States. Because the other regions never contained more than limited amounts of good-quality lynx habitat, those areas are not considered to represent a significant portion of the species' range.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.085
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.170
GPT teacher head0.382
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

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

Citations43
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueConservation BiologySame topicConservation, Ecology, Wildlife EducationFrench-language works237,207