MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4297536966 · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2022.09.002

Demystifying ecological connectivity for actionable spatial conservation planning

2022· review· en· W4297536966 on OpenAlexafffund
Maria Beger, Anna Meta×as, Arieanna C. Balbar, Jennifer McGowan, Rémi Daigle, Caitlin D. Kuempel, Eric A. Treml, Hugh P. Possingham

Bibliographic record

VenueTrends in Ecology & Evolution · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSpecies Distribution and Climate Change
Canadian institutionsBedford Institute of OceanographyFisheries and Oceans CanadaDalhousie University
FundersAustralian Research CouncilNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaInstitut Nordique De Recherche En Environnement Et En Santé Au TravailConsortium for Energy, Environment and DemilitarizationFisheries and Oceans CanadaUniversity of LeedsNature ConservancyUniversity of MelbourneCentre of Excellence for Environmental Decisions, Australian Research Council
KeywordsGeographyEnvironmental resource managementEcologyEnvironmental planningEnvironmental scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Connectivity underpins the persistence of life; it needs to inform biodiversity conservation decisions. Yet, when prioritising conservation areas and developing actions, connectivity is not being operationalised in spatial planning. The challenge is the translation of flows associated with connectivity into conservation objectives that lead to actions. Connectivity is nebulous, it can be abstract and mean different things to different people, making it difficult to include in conservation problems. Here, we show how connectivity can be included in mathematically defining conservation planning objectives. We provide a path forward for linking connectivity to high-level conservation goals, such as increasing species' persistence. We propose ways to design spatial management areas that gain biodiversity benefit from connectivity.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.881
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0620.000

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 head0.150
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.218 · 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.

Study designOther design
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

Citations158
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTrends in Ecology & EvolutionSame topicSpecies Distribution and Climate ChangeFrench-language works237,207