MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3157343145 · doi:10.1111/csp2.437

Habitat loss accelerates for the endangered woodland caribou in western Canada

2021· article· en· W3157343145 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Mariana B. Nagy‐Reis, Melanie Dickie, Anna M. Calvert, Mark Hebblewhite, Dave Hervieux, Dale R. Seip, Sophie L. Gilbert, Oscar Venter, Craig A. DeMars, Stan Boutin, Robert Serrouya

Bibliographic record

VenueConservation Science and Practice · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British ColumbiaNorthwestern PolytechnicMinistry of EnvironmentEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaAlberta Biodiversity Monitoring InstituteAlberta Environment and Protected AreasUniversity of Alberta
FundersMitacsGovernment of AlbertaUniversity of MontanaEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsWoodland caribouEndangered speciesHabitatCritical habitatHabitat destructionHabitat conservationGeographyEcologyThreatened speciesTaigaBorealBiologyForestry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Habitat loss is often the ultimate cause of species endangerment and is also a leading factor inhibiting species recovery. For this reason, species‐at‐risk legislation, policies and plans typically focus on habitat conservation and restoration as mechanisms for recovery. To assess the effectiveness of these instruments in decelerating habitat loss, we evaluated spatiotemporal habitat changes for an iconic endangered species, woodland caribou ( Rangifer tarandus caribou ). We quantified changes in forest cover, a key proxy of caribou habitat, for all caribou subpopulations in Alberta and British Columbia, Canada. Despite efforts under federal and provincial recovery plans, and requirements listed under Canada's Species at Risk Act, caribou subpopulations lost twice as much habitat as they gained during a 12‐year period (2000–2012). Drivers of habitat loss varied by ecotype, with Boreal and Northern Mountain caribou affected most by forest fire and Southern Mountain caribou affected more by forest harvest. Our case study emphasizes critical gaps between recovery planning and habitat management actions, which are a core expectation under most species‐at‐risk legislation. Loss of caribou habitat from 2000 to 2018 has accelerated. Linear features within caribou ranges have also increased over time, particularly seismic lines within Boreal caribou ranges, and we estimated that only 5% of seismic lines have functionally regenerated. Our findings support the idea that short‐term recovery actions such as predator reductions and translocations will likely just delay caribou extinction in the absence of well‐considered habitat management. Given the magnitude of ongoing habitat change, it is clear that unless the cumulative impacts of land‐uses are effectively addressed through planning and management actions that consider anthropogenic and natural disturbances, we will fail to achieve self‐sustaining woodland caribou populations across much of North America.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.077

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations86
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueConservation Science and PracticeSame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207