Landscape Context and Fragmentation Effects on Forest Birds in Southern Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We examined the effects of patch size, local forest cover, and regional forest cover on the numbers and species composition of forest birds detected during fixed-radius point counts in 287 forest patches in four replicate study areas in southern Ontario. Each study area consisted of two subareas differing in regional forest cover. The number of forest-interior species (as classified from the literature) detected per count, after controlling for forest patch size, tended to be higher in subareas with greater regional forest cover, but this effect was much stronger in some study areas than others. In contrast, numbers of edge species and interior-edge generalists were higher in subareas with lower regional forest cover. Within study areas, the number of forest-interior species increased and edge species decreased with both woodlot size and core area (amount of forest >100 m from an edge), but total species diversity at a point was relatively unaffected. Analyses of individual species generally corroborated the patterns, except that some so-called interior-edge generalists were more likely to be detected in large woodlots, while others were more likely in small woodlots. There was a tendency for the loss of forest-interior species with decreasing woodlot size to be greatest in subareas with low regional forest cover. In the context of highly fragmented landscapes such as southern Ontario, where many forest-dependent species have become rare, forest conservation should focus on protecting or restoring larger forest tracts in areas with substantial remaining regional forest cover. Efectos del Contexto del Paisaje y la Fragmentación sobre Aves de Bosque en el Sur de Ontario Resumen. Examinamos el efecto del tamaño de parches y de la cobertura de bosque a escalas local y regional sobre el número y composición de especies de aves de bosque. Las aves fueron detectadas mediante puntos de conteo de radio fijo en 287 parches de bosque, en cuatro áreas de estudio replicadas en el sur de Ontario. Cada área de estudio consistió en dos sub-áreas, las que se diferenciaron en la cantidad de cobertura regional de bosque. Luego de controlar por el área de los parches, el número de especies de interior de bosque (clasificadas según la literatura) detectadas por conteo tendió a ser mayor en sub-áreas con mayor cobertura regional de bosque. Sin embargo, este efecto fue mucho mayor en algunas áreas de estudio que en otras. En contraste, los números de especies de borde y especies generalistas de borde-interior fueron mayores en las sub-áreas con menor cobertura regional de bosque. Dentro de cada área de estudio, el número de especies de interior de bosque aumentó y el número de especies de borde disminuyó con el aumento del tamaño y del área nucleo (cantidad de bosque a >100 m del borde) de los fragmentos de bosque, pero la diversidad total de especies en un punto no se vió relativamente afectada. Los análisis individuales por especie corroboraron los patrones observados, exceptuando que alguna especies llamadas generalistas de borde-interior tuvieron una mayor probabilidad de ser detectadas en fragmentos grandes, mientras que otras tuvieron mayor probabilidad en fragmentos pequeños. La tendencia más marcada a perder especies de interior de bosque con la reducción del área de los fragmentos ocurrió en las sub-áreas con baja cobertura regional de bosque. En paisajes en un contexto altamente fragmentado tales como en el sur de Ontario, donde muchas especies dependientes de bosque se han tornado escasas, la conservación de bosques debiera estar enfocada a la protección o restauración de grandes extenciones de bosque en áreas donde la cobertura regional de bosque es aún substancial.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".