MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2347029077 · doi:10.1139/cjfr-2015-0431

Conserving woodland caribou habitat while maintaining timber yield: a graph theory approach

2016· article· en· W2347029077 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Jonathan L. W. Ruppert, Marie‐Josée Fortin, Eldon A. Gunn, David L. Martell

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife-Road Interactions and Conservation
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsWoodland caribouHabitatWoodlandThreatened speciesGeographyTaigaLoggingEcologyAgroforestryEnvironmental scienceForestryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The fragmentation and loss of old-growth forest has led to the decline of many forest-dwelling species that depend on old-growth forest as habitat. Emblematic of this issue in many areas of the managed boreal forest in Canada is the threatened woodland caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou (Gmelin, 1788)). We develop a methodology to help determine when and how timber can be harvested to best satisfy both industrial timber supply and woodland caribou habitat requirements. To start, we use least-cost paths based on graph theory to determine the configuration of woodland caribou preferred habitat patches. We then developed a heuristic procedure to schedule timber harvesting based on a trade-off between merchantable wood volume and the remaining amount of habitat and its connectivity during a planning cycle. Our heuristic can attain 84% of the potential woodland caribou habitat that would be available in the absence of harvesting at the end of a 100 year planning horizon. Interestingly, this is more than that which is attained by the current plan (50%) and a harvesting plan that targets high volume stands (32%). Our results indicate that our heuristic procedure (i.e., an ecologically tuned optimization approach) may better direct industrial activities to improve old-growth habitat while maintaining specified timber production levels.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.166
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
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)0.0030.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations16
Published2016
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicWildlife-Road Interactions and ConservationFrench-language works237,207