Mapping distribution and identifying gaps in protected area coverage of vulnerable clouded leopard (Neofelis nebulosa) in Nepal: Implications for conservation management
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Clouded leopard (Neofelis nebulosa) is listed as vulnerable by the IUCN red list and is a protected species in Nepal. However, there is limited information on its status and distribution, which is a critical first step in conservation planning and management. To address this knowledge gap, this study attempts to: (a) predict the potential suitable habitat for the clouded leopard in Nepal with available occurrence point, (b) determine important variables (bioclimatic and environmental) responsible for its distribution and range limits, and (c) evaluate coverage of existing protected areas (PAs) in Nepal using MaxEnt modeling. The current model with a high discriminative ability (AUC = 0.945, TSS = 0.780) predicts 11,794 km2 suitable habitat for clouded leopard in Nepal, of which 72% of the area is distributed outside the current protected areas network of Nepal. Most of these habitats lie in the Middle mountain and Hilly regions, distributed from the Pachthar Ilam Taplejung corridor in the east to Annapurna Conservation Area in the mid-central part of Nepal. The most important variables responsible for its distribution were the mean Normalized Difference Vegetation Index (NDVI), Isothermality, and the precipitation of the coldest quarter associated with the forest cover landscape and climate. Deforestation and fragmentation of habitat and climate change in the Middle mountain and Hilly region, and occasional poaching are significant concerns, and may pose threats for the long-term conservation of this species. We recommend establishing community-based conservation areas in the Middle mountain and Hilly regions and investigating species distribution, status, and ecology, including its prey and habitat, across the Nepalese landscape. Identification of habitats and conservation opportunities is crucial for species' long-term conservation. Hence, the map produced here can serve as a reference for future investigations into clouded leopard distribution and could be a significant tool for formulating and implementing conservation strategies in Nepal.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".