MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2970134035 · doi:10.5539/jas.v11n15p200

Spatial-Temporal Dynamics of Vegetation Cover in a Diversity Hotspot for the Conservation of Brazilian Cerrado

2019· article· en· W2970134035 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Nathan Castro Fonsêca, Giselle Lemos Moreira, José Nailson Barros Santos, Marília Isabelle O. da Silva, Máida Cynthia Duca de Lima, Ana Jéssica S. Barbosa, Jéssica Stéfane Alves Cunha, Diogo José O. Pimentel, Flávio Cipriano de Assis do Carmo, Felipe Amorim

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLand Use and Ecosystem Services
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGrasslandLand coverVegetation (pathology)Land useAgroforestryGeographyPastureAgricultureForestryEnvironmental scienceEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work investigates the spatial-temporal dynamics of land use and vegetation covers in a conservation area of Cerrado, in the county of Currais, Piauí, in which the economy depends on large agricultural projects. We used maps of a 32-year time series (1985 to 2017) of land use and cover provided by the Brazilian Annual Land Use and Land Cover Mapping Project (MapBiomas). We assessed six classes of land uses and vegetation covers: forest, savanna, grassland, agriculture/pasture, non-vegetated area, and water bodies. There was a fast increase in pressure on natural ecosystems from 1985 and 2017, primarily from 2000. The land use for agriculture and pasture increased from 0.26% (726.93 ha) in 2000 to 16% (50,772.63 ha) in 2017. During this period, the native vegetation decreased 15.90%, with savannas suffering the largest loss in hectares of vegetation (41,663.73 ha), followed by the forests (9,837.35 ha). The grassland cover, non-vegetated area, and water bodies remained unchanged. These results provide essential information for decision making and can be used to guide public policies for the conservation, monitoring, and sustainable management of remnant vegetation areas.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.061
Threshold uncertainty score0.121

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural ScienceSame topicLand Use and Ecosystem ServicesFrench-language works237,207