Mapping potential effects of proposed roads on migratory connectivity for a highly mobile herbivore using circuit theory
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Migration is common worldwide as species access spatiotemporally varying resources and avoid predators and parasites. However, long-distance migrations are increasingly imperiled due to development and habitat fragmentation. Improved understanding of migratory behavior has implications for conservation and management of migratory species, allowing identification and protection of seasonal ranges and migration corridors. We present a technique that applies circuit theory to predict future effects of development by analyzing season-specific resistance to movement from anthropogenic and natural environmental features across an entire migratory path. We demonstrate the utility of our approach by examining potential effects of a proposed road system on barren ground caribou (Rangifer tarandus granti) and subsistence hunters in northern Alaska. Resource selection functions revealed migratory selection by caribou. We tested five scenarios relating habitat selection to landscape resistance using Circuitscape and GPS telemetry data. To examine the effect of potential roads on connectivity of migrating animals and human hunters, we compared current flow values near communities in the presence of proposed roads. Caribou avoided dense vegetation, rugged terrain, major rivers, and existing roads in both spring and fall. A negative linear relationship between resource selection and landscape resistance was strongly supported for fall migration while spring migration featured a negative logarithmic relationship. Overall patterns of caribou connectivity remained similar in the presence of proposed roads, though reduced current flow was predicted for communities near the center of current migration areas. Such data can inform decisions to allow or disallow projects or to select among alternative development proposals and mitigation measures, though consideration of cumulative effects of development is needed. Our approach is flexible and can easily be adapted to other species, locations and development scenarios to expand understanding of movement behavior and to evaluate proposed developments. Such information is vital to inform policy decisions that balance new development, resource user needs, and preservation of ecosystem function.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".