Los comienzos de la protección de las aves en España (1879-1936): Graells, el marqués de Cusano y las sociedades protectoras de animales
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The history of the legal protection of birds in Spain during the second half of the twentieth century is well known, highlighting as relevant facts the foundation of the Spanish Ornithological Society (1954), the contribution of renowned scientists (especially José Antonio Valverde and Francisco Bernis), and the media impact of a charismatic character, Félix Rodríguez de la Fuente. But there were few works that addressed this issue in older times. However, recent studies, which are synthesized here, have revealed that previous efforts to protect an array of birds, considered useful to agriculture, were more intense and complex than previously believed. They were developed during the last quarter of the 19th century and the first third of the 20th, in line with similar international initiatives. Politicians and hunters such as Felipe Juez-Sarmiento (Marquis of Cusano), technicians and scientists, especially the prestigious zoologist Mariano de la Paz Graells (1809-1898), and animal protection societies participated in this process. Nevertheless, there was no coordinated action and no specific institutional structures were created. Finally, although some memorable results were achieved favouring the conservation of certain species, the protective impulse ended up blurred under the pressure of a powerful faction of the hunting sector.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".