Toward a climate‐informed North American protected areas network: Incorporating climate‐change refugia and corridors in conservation planning
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Global and national commitments to slow biodiversity loss by expanding protected area networks also provide opportunities to evaluate conservation priorities in the face of climate change. Using recently developed indicators of climatic macrorefugia, environmental diversity, and corridors, we conducted a systematic, climate‐informed prioritization of conservation values across North America. We explicitly considered complementarity of multiple conservation objectives, capturing key niche‐based temperature and moisture thresholds for 324 tree species and 268 songbird species. Conservation rankings were influenced most strongly by climate corridors and species‐specific refugia layers. Although areas of high conservation value under climate change were partially aligned with existing protected areas, ∼80% of areas within the top quintile of biome‐level conservation values lack formal protection. Results from this study and application of our approach elsewhere can help improve the long‐term value of conservation investments at multiple spatial scales.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it