MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2552354358 · doi:10.1111/ddi.12508

Assessing the effectiveness of China's protected areas to conserve current and future amphibian diversity

2016· article· en· W2552354358 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

VenueDiversity and Distributions · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSpecies Distribution and Climate Change
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaChina Scholarship CouncilSociedad Española de Nefrología
KeywordsSpecies richnessEcologyHabitatBiodiversityProtected areaGeographyAmphibianEndemismRange (aeronautics)Global biodiversitySpecies diversitySpecies distributionBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Aim Protected areas are an important tool for conserving species. In this study, we assessed the effectiveness of protected areas to conserve amphibian biodiversity in response to future changes in climate and land use. Location China. Methods Range maps and occurrence records of amphibian species in China were analysed separately using ensemble species distribution modelling across three spatial scales to assess scale dependency. Climate velocity and corresponding residence time in protected areas and species’ ranges were calculated, together with a number of other effectiveness indices. Results Predicted declines in amphibian richness, endemism, phylogenetic diversity, phylogenetic endemism and suitable habitat were lower in protected than in unprotected areas, complementary‐priority sites or richness hotspots. However, less‐disturbed amphibian habitat, calculated from current and future projected land use data, in both protected and unprotected areas were consistently lost over time although this reduction was lower in protected areas. Although residence time of precipitation was longer in protected areas and within species’ ranges in protected areas, resident time of temperature was significantly shorter in both. These results were consistent regardless of data sources and spatial scales. Main conclusions China's current protected areas are predicted to maintain future amphibian distribution and diversity, but are insufficient in preventing the losses of suitable climate and areas of less‐disturbed habitat. The top 10% of future conservation gaps for amphibians were identified in China based on performance of effectiveness indices. The two largest gaps prioritized for future protected areas include the southern parts of Tibet and the Hengduan Mountains.

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 categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient 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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.002
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.229 · 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