MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2222573199 · doi:10.1093/conphys/cov057

Success stories and emerging themes in conservation physiology

2016· article· en· W2222573199 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueConservation Physiology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSpecies Distribution and Climate Change
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WinnipegCarleton UniversityWestern UniversityUniversity of Windsor
FundersSociety for Integrative and Comparative BiologyU.S. Department of AgricultureNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaDalhousie UniversityCanadian Society of ZoologistsNational Institute of General Medical SciencesUniversity of WindsorNational Institutes of HealthCanada Research ChairsFogarty International CenterU.S. Environmental Protection AgencyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsConservation psychologyBiologyConservation biologyConservation scienceWildlifeDiversity (politics)EcologyEnvironmental resource managementWildlife conservationEnvironmental planningBiodiversityGeographyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The potential benefits of physiology for conservation are well established and include greater specificity of management techniques, determination of cause-effect relationships, increased sensitivity of health and disturbance monitoring and greater capacity for predicting future change. While descriptions of the specific avenues in which conservation and physiology can be integrated are readily available and important to the continuing expansion of the discipline of 'conservation physiology', to date there has been no assessment of how the field has specifically contributed to conservation success. However, the goal of conservation physiology is to foster conservation solutions and it is therefore important to assess whether physiological approaches contribute to downstream conservation outcomes and management decisions. Here, we present eight areas of conservation concern, ranging from chemical contamination to invasive species to ecotourism, where physiological approaches have led to beneficial changes in human behaviour, management or policy. We also discuss the shared characteristics of these successes, identifying emerging themes in the discipline. Specifically, we conclude that conservation physiology: (i) goes beyond documenting change to provide solutions; (ii) offers a diversity of physiological metrics beyond glucocorticoids (stress hormones); (iii) includes approaches that are transferable among species, locations and times; (iv) simultaneously allows for human use and benefits to wildlife; and (v) is characterized by successes that can be difficult to find in the primary literature. Overall, we submit that the field of conservation physiology has a strong foundation of achievements characterized by a diversity of conservation issues, taxa, physiological traits, ecosystem types and spatial scales. We hope that these concrete successes will encourage the continued evolution and use of physiological tools within conservation-based research and management plans.

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.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.714
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.236 · 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