MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3205183691 · doi:10.1111/rec.13580

Optimal restoration of wildlife habitat in landscapes fragmented by resource extraction: a network flow modeling approach

2021· article· en· W3205183691 on OpenAlexaffabout
Denys Yemshanov, Mackenzie Simpson, Frank Koch, Marc‐André Parisien, Quinn E. Barber, Fabio Campioni, Fin Macdermid, Salimur Choudhury

Bibliographic record

VenueRestoration Ecology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife Ecology and Conservation
Canadian institutionsLakehead UniversityAssembly of First NationsNatural Resources CanadaCanadian Forest Service
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWoodland caribouHabitatWildlifeWoodlandGeographyBorealRestoration ecologyWildlife corridorResource (disambiguation)Environmental scienceHabitat destructionPopulationCritical habitatEcologyEnvironmental resource managementComputer scienceEndangered species

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Non‐renewable resource extraction contributes greatly to degradation of wildlife habitats in boreal landscapes. In western Canada, oil and gas exploration and extraction have left a dense network of linear disturbances (seismic lines) and abandoned well pads that have fragmented boreal forest. Among multiple ecological effects, these disturbances have increased predator access to the preferred habitat of some wildlife taxa, most notably boreal woodland caribou, resulting in population declines. Restoration of seismic lines and abandoned well pads is a critical activity to improve the recovery of woodland caribou populations. We present a linear programming model that optimally allocates restoration efforts to maximize the access of caribou to nearby undisturbed habitat in a fragmented landscape. We applied the model to examine restoration scenarios in the Cold Lake First Nations area in northeastern Alberta, Canada, which includes caribou habitat but also areas of active oil and gas extraction. The model depicts the landscape as a network of interconnected habitat patches and combines three network flow sub‐problems. The first sub‐problem enforces the spatial connectivity of the remaining network of unrestored sites. The second sub‐problem maximizes access to suitable habitat from the restored locations and the third sub‐problem ensures the allocation of restoration activities in as few spatially contiguous restoration projects as possible. The approach is generalizable and applicable to assist restoration planning in other resource extraction regions and for other taxa.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.141
Threshold uncertainty score0.551

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations6
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRestoration EcologySame topicWildlife Ecology and ConservationFrench-language works237,207