MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2997455246 · doi:10.1111/csp2.163

A field‐validated species distribution model to support management of the critically endangered Poweshiek skipperling ( <scp> <i>Oarisma poweshiek</i> </scp> ) butterfly in Canada

2019· article· en· W2997455246 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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueConservation Science and Practice · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSpecies Distribution and Climate Change
Canadian institutionsResearch ManitobaUniversity of Winnipeg
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHabitatEndangered speciesButterflyCovariateCritically endangeredEcologyPopulationStatisticsStatistical modelEnvironmental scienceGeographyBiologyMathematicsDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Poweshiek skipperling ( Oarisma poweshiek ) is a critically endangered grassland butterfly with six populations remaining in the United States and Canada. The single Canadian population, with the largest remaining contiguous habitat, includes less than ~50 observed individuals and extirpation is potentially imminent. Captive breeding is underway and there is a need to locate suitable sites for reintroduction and habitat management. Species distribution models (SDMs) predict habitat quality and guide management decisions. Most SDMs rely on statistical validation as a surrogate metric for accuracy, with presence‐only SDMs usually reporting area under the curve (AUC). Although experts have long cautioned against relying on statistical validation alone, accuracy is rarely field‐validated. We developed a presence‐only SDM using the maximum entropy (Maxent) method to predict probability of occurrence for the Poweshiek skipperling and determine environmental covariates associated with high probability of occurrence. We collected two independent datasets to (a) calibrate our model to predict categories of habitat quality (using factor analysis) and (b) compare expected and observed habitat quality to calculate model accuracy. Statistical validation showed that we predicted presence‐absence of training data with high accuracy (AUC = 0.98). Covariates responsible for most of the variation in probability of occurrence included soil drainage, habitat patch size, and land use type. Only 0.4% of the study area was expected to represent good‐excellent habitat with the remaining 99.6% medium‐poor. Our model predicted novel habitat quality with 81% accuracy (better than chance). Poor‐medium habitat was predicted more accurately (92%) than good‐excellent habitat (54%). Our model showed better accuracy than most other field‐validated SDMs reviewed. We reiterate calls for greater field‐validation of SDMs: if we had relied on statistical validation alone, perceived accuracy of our model would be inflated. Finally, managers can use our results to reliably exclude predicted poor‐medium habitats as candidates for Poweshiek skipperling habitat management or reintroduction.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.171
Threshold uncertainty score0.950

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.239 · 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