A local optimization framework for addressing conservation conflicts in mosaic ecosystems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An effective strategy to resolve conservation conflicts on lands outside of nature reserves is to consider the spatial arrangement of agricultural and native vegetation parcels such that the ecological value of the landscape is improved without reducing the amount of land used for agricultural production. Global optimization methods have been used to identify the best spatial arrangement of land parcels for a given project goal, but these methods are not designed to provide pathways to reach the optimum from the initial landscape. Here we describe how local search algorithms can be used to develop land parcel rearrangement pathways to obtain a landscape that sustains greater species richness than the initial landscape without changing the amount of land used for agricultural production. To demonstrate how the local optimization framework can be applied, an ecological setting based on a forest-grassland mosaic ecosystem in Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil was constructed. Plant samples collected from this region were used to construct species area curves. Multiple locally optimal solutions that improved the modeled species richness of the landscape almost to globally optimal levels were identified. To support the results, the algorithm was also applied to a 306,250 ha forest-grassland region of Rio Grande do Sul. The case study results suggested that conservation polices solely based on landowners satisfying a legal reserve percentage on their property should be revised to consider landscape-level connectivity. Providing multiple possible solutions for landscape configurations using local optimization methods may improve managerial flexibility for decision-makers, compared to global optimization approaches providing a single solution. Furthermore, the algorithm details the parcel exchange pathways that are required to reach the optimal land state. We conclude that local and global optimization approaches can be used in combination to improve land use decision-making for conservation, in mosaic ecosystems as well as other terrestrial ecosystems.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".