An integrative approach to regional mapping of suitable habitat for the Blanding’s turtle ( Emydoidea blandingii ) on islands in Georgian Bay, Lake Huron
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mapping suitable habitat for a species at risk is one of the first steps in a conservation plan. Creating habitat suitability maps can be very challenging when the area of interest is large and located in remote areas where field excursions can be difficult to implement. Such is the case for the Blanding’s turtle, a threatened species in Ontario, that live on the Georgian Bay archipelago. With increasing anthropogenic pressures, maps indicating suitable habitat can aid management decisions and prioritize areas for protection. We apply an interdisciplinary approach using traditional field data and generalized linear models to produce high resolution, regional maps which identify suitable habitat for Blanding’s turtles throughout the archipelago. We assessed the accuracy of our models using an independent survey dataset of 16 island sites distributed throughout the archipelago, and evaluated models using a reference island as a threshold for determining suitability of survey sites. Islands with higher proportions of wetlands and vernal pools were generally considered to be suitable for Blanding’s turtles compared to those with lower proportions. Our findings highlight the importance of both permanent and temporary wet habitats for Blanding’s turtles. Based on our final model, approximately 64% of evaluated islands support habitat for Blanding’s turtles. Our study is the first to produce detailed habitat suitability maps for Blanding’s turtles on the Georgian Bay archipelago. We recommend an integrative approach be applied to create habitat suitability maps for other species at risk in Georgian Bay.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".