MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2169744855 · doi:10.3732/ajb.1200059

Projections of suitable habitat under climate change scenarios: Implications for trans‐boundary assisted colonization

2012· article· en· W2169744855 on OpenAlexaffabout
F. Thomas Ledig, Gerald E. Rehfeldt, Barry Jaquish

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Botany · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSpecies Distribution and Climate Change
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Forests
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClimate changeHabitatEcologyExtinction (optical mineralogy)Range (aeronautics)Extinction debtColonizationGeographyHabitat destructionBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PREMISE OF THE STUDY: Climate change may threaten endemic species with extinction, particularly relicts of the Arcto-Tertiary Forest, by elimination of their contemporary habitat. Projections of future habitat are necessary to plan for conservation of these species. METHODS: We used spline climatic models and modified Random Forests statistical procedures to predict suitable habitats for Brewer spruce (Picea breweriana), which is endemic to the Klamath Region of California and Oregon. We used three general circulation models and two sets of carbon emission scenarios (optimistic and pessimistic) for future climates. KEY RESULTS: Our procedures predicted present occurrence of Brewer spruce perfectly. For the decades 2030, 2060, and 2090, its projected range within the Klamath Region progressively declined, to the point of disappearance in the decade 2090. The climate niche was projected to move north to British Columbia, the Yukon Territory, and southeastern Alaska. CONCLUSION: The results emphasize the necessity of assisted colonization and trans-boundary movement to prevent extinction of Brewer spruce. The projections provide a framework for formulating conservation plans, but planners must also consider regulations regarding international plant transfers.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.082
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.251 · 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

Citations19
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of BotanySame topicSpecies Distribution and Climate ChangeFrench-language works237,207