MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2796349974 · doi:10.1111/geb.12731

Macrorefugia for North American trees and songbirds: Climatic limiting factors and multi‐scale topographic influences

2018· article· en· W2796349974 on OpenAlexaffabout
Diana Stralberg, Carlos Carroll, John Pedlar, Chad B. Wilsey, Daniel W. McKenney, Scott E. Nielsen

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Ecology and Biogeography · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSpecies Distribution and Climate Change
Canadian institutionsCanadian Forest ServiceUniversity of Alberta
FundersWilburforce FoundationJohn D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation
KeywordsSongbirdEcologyPrecipitationGeographyClimate changeSpecies richnessElevation (ballistics)Physical geographyVegetation (pathology)WoodlandTaxonSpatial ecologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Aim To inform conservation planning in the face of climate change, our objectives were to map spatial patterns of tree and songbird macrorefugia; to identify climatic limiting factors by region and taxonomic group; and to quantify multi‐scale topographic components of end‐of‐century biotic refugia. Location United States and Canada outside the far north. Time period End of the 21st century. Major taxa studied Trees and songbirds. Methods We used species distribution models for 324 trees and 268 songbirds to develop a macrorefugia index using species‐specific climate velocity. Maps of multispecies refugia potential were developed for each taxonomic/functional group and quantile regression was used to identify climatic limiting factors and relationships with multi‐scale topographic variables. Results End‐of‐century macrorefugia for both trees and songbirds were concentrated in western mountains and, to a lesser extent, in north‐eastern coastal regions. For the highest‐value refugia, precipitation was generally most limiting in the north, and warm temperatures and moisture availability were limiting in the south. Tree refugia were more limited by precipitation and moisture, while songbird refugia were more limited by temperature. Upper‐percentile refugia, but not median values, were well explained by topographic conditions. Songbird refugia were strongly associated with elevation, while coastal proximity and landform composition (particularly headwaters) were important for both groups. There was a general lack of concordance between patterns of current species richness and future climate refugia. Main conclusions Macrorefugia patterns are partly explained by steep elevational or latitudinal temperature gradients and/or moderate climates, such as coastal regions. However, climatic limiting factors for these refugia suggest contrasts in the ecological processes governing warm‐end range limits for different taxa in different regions. Our framework can be applied to other regions, taxa, and time periods to generate and explain biologically meaningful indices of macrorefugia for conservation planning.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.972

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 studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.238 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations76
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Ecology and BiogeographySame topicSpecies Distribution and Climate ChangeFrench-language works237,207