MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2158225004 · doi:10.1098/rspb.2006.0338

Experimental simulations about the effects of overexploitation and habitat fragmentation on populations facing environmental warming

2007· article· en· W2158225004 on OpenAlexaff
Camilo Mora, Rebekka Metzger, Audrey Rollo, Ransom A. Myers

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSpecies Distribution and Climate Change
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
FundersAlfred P. Sloan Foundation
KeywordsOverexploitationBiodiversityHabitat fragmentationPopulationEcologyHabitat destructionHabitatPopulation sizeExtinction (optical mineralogy)Climate changeFragmentation (computing)Population fragmentationPopulation declineGeographyBiologyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Populations of many species are dramatically declining worldwide, but the causal mechanism remains debated among different human-related threats. Coping with this uncertainty is critical to several issues about the conservation and future of biodiversity, but remains challenging due to difficulties associated with the experimental manipulation and/or isolation of the effects of such threats under field conditions. Using controlled microcosm populations, we quantified the individual and combined effects of environmental warming, overexploitation and habitat fragmentation on population persistence. Individually, each of these threats produced similar and significant population declines, which were accelerated to different degrees depending upon particular interactions. The interaction between habitat fragmentation and harvesting generated an additive decline in population size. However, both of these threats reduced population resistance causing synergistic declines in populations also facing environmental warming. Declines in population size were up to 50 times faster when all threats acted together. These results indicate that species may be facing risks of extinction higher than those anticipated from single threat analyses and suggest that all threats should be mitigated simultaneously, if current biodiversity declines are to be reversed.

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations138
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Royal Society B Biological SciencesSame topicSpecies Distribution and Climate ChangeFrench-language works237,207