MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4296311254 · doi:10.1007/s11625-022-01223-x

An ecosystem service approach to the study of vineyard landscapes in the context of climate change: a review

2022· review· en· W4296311254 on OpenAlexafffund
Sebastian Candiago, Klara J. Winkler, Valentina Giombini, Carlo Giupponi, Lukas Egarter Vigl

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainability Science · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicHorticultural and Viticultural Research
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersInterregNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsEcosystem servicesVineyardEnvironmental resource managementClimate changeEcosystemProvisioningContext (archaeology)Total human ecosystemEcosystem healthBusinessEnvironmental planningEcologyGeographyEnvironmental scienceComputer scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Vineyard landscapes significantly contribute to the economy, identity, culture, and biodiversity of many regions worldwide. Climate change, however, is increasingly threatening the resilience of vineyard landscapes and of their ecological conditions, undermining the provision of multiple ecosystem services. Previous research has often focused on climate change impacts, ecosystem conditions and ecosystem services without systematically reviewing how they have been studied in the literature on viticulture. Here, we systematically review the literature on vineyard landscapes to identify how ecosystem conditions and services have been investigated, and whether an integrative approach to investigate the effects of climate change was adopted. Our results indicate that there are still very few studies that explicitly address multiple ecosystem conditions and services together. Only 28 and 18% of the reviewed studies considered more than two ecosystem conditions or services, respectively. Moreover, while more than 97% of the relationships between ecosystem conditions and services studied were addressing provisioning and regulating services, only 3% examined cultural services. Finally, this review found that there is a lack of integrative studies that address simultaneously the relationships between ecosystem condition, ecosystem services and climate change (only 15 out of 112 studies). To overcome these gaps and to better understand the functioning of vineyard socio-ecological systems under climate change, multidisciplinary, integrative, and comprehensive approaches should be adopted by future studies. A holistic understanding of vineyard landscapes will indeed be crucial to support researchers and decision makers in developing sustainable adaptation strategies that enhance the ecological condition of vineyards and ensure the provision of multiple ecosystem services under future climate scenarios. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11625-022-01223-x.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0090.011
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations28
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainability ScienceSame topicHorticultural and Viticultural ResearchFrench-language works237,207