MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2972718527 · doi:10.1111/fwb.13395

Evaluating functional diversity conservation for freshwater fishes resulting from terrestrial protected areas

2019· article· en· W2972718527 on OpenAlexaffabout
Karl A. Lamothe, Karen M. Alofs, Cindy Chu

Bibliographic record

VenueFreshwater Biology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Natural Resources and ForestryUniversity of TorontoFisheries and Oceans Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThreatened speciesEcologySpecies richnessFreshwater ecosystemTrophic levelFreshwater fishBiodiversityEcosystemBeta diversityBiologyFisheryFish <Actinopterygii>Habitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Protected areas are one of the hammers in conservation toolkits, yet few protected areas exist that were designed to protect freshwater ecosystems. This is problematic as freshwater ecosystems are among the most threatened systems on earth. Nonetheless, terrestrial protected areas ( TPA s) may afford spill‐over benefits to freshwater ecosystems included within their boundaries, but evaluations of these potential benefits for the protection of freshwater fish diversity are lacking. Using fish community data from 175 lakes inside, outside, or bordering TPA s in Ontario, Canada, we sought to determine if TPA s preserve fish functional diversity. We focused on functional diversity because previous work indicated no taxonomic differences between these lakes, but a difference in normalised‐length size‐spectra slopes inside versus outside TPA s (indicator of unique predator–prey ratios and trophic energy transfer). We expected that communities inside TPA s would show greater functional diversity (i.e. functional dispersion and functional richness) and have more extreme trait combinations (i.e. functional divergence) than communities outside or bordering TPA s. We also tested for differences in the rarity of species‐specific functional traits between fish communities inside, outside, or bordering TPA s, between thermal guilds, and across average body size and overall prevalence of the species. Our results indicated no significant differences in functional diversity among lake fish communities inside, outside, or bordering TPA s. However, fish communities inside TPA s had more extreme trait combinations than outside TPA s because abundant species in lake communities outside TPA s had more ubiquitous trait combinations than abundant fishes inside TPA s. Small‐bodied species showed greater functional rarity than large‐bodied species, indicating that small‐bodied fishes fill functionally unique roles while the most prevalent, large‐bodied species possess a more generalist set of traits. Overall, the similarity of functional diversity metrics for lake fish communities inside, outside, or bordering TPA s in Ontario suggests that TPA s capture the functional diversity of Ontario's lake fish communities. However, we encourage similar evaluations in regions where environmental conditions and stressors are more distinct across TPA boundaries than they are in Ontario, as these types of evaluations will inform guidelines for the design of freshwater protected areas and monitoring of their effectiveness in the future.

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 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 score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations8
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFreshwater BiologySame topicFish Ecology and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207