MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4309741036 · doi:10.3390/land11112087

Impact of Human Disturbances on the Spatial Heterogeneity of Landscape Fragmentation in Qilian Mountain National Park, China

2022· article· en· W4309741036 on OpenAlexaff
Baifei Ren, Keunhyun Park, Anil Shrestha, Jun Yang, Melissa R. McHale, Weilan Bai, Guangyu Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueLand · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicLand Use and Ecosystem Services
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeographyFragmentation (computing)TourismNational parkEnvironmental resource managementAgricultureBiodiversityOvergrazingHabitat fragmentationChinaEcologyEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Qilian Mountain National Park (QLMNP) is a biodiversity hotspot with great agriculture and tourism resources. With the expansion of human activities, a few areas of the park are experiencing massive landscape transformation, and these areas are also highly ecologically sensitive. Nevertheless, there are substantial differences in the human activities and natural resources of various communities around QLMNP, resulting in heterogeneous landscape degradation. Hence, this study explores the extent and drivers of spatial heterogeneity in landscape fragmentation associated with ecologically vulnerable communities in QLMNP. Multiple ring buffer analysis and geographically weighted regression (GWR) were used to analyze the relationships between landscape fragmentation and variables of human activities and facilities to identify the main factors influencing landscape fragmentation in different regions. The results reveal that human disturbance had a stronger relationship with landscape fragmentation in QLMNP than natural factors do. Among the drivers of landscape fragmentation, the distribution of residential areas and the extension of agricultural land were found to have more significant impacts than tourism. Expansion of cropland had a greater impact on the eastern part of the national park, where overgrazing and farming require further regulation, while tourism affected the landscape fragmentation in the central area of the national park. The point-shaped human disturbance had a larger impact than the linear disturbance. The study findings can be used to formulate a comprehensive plan to determine the extent to which agriculture and tourism should be developed to avoid excessive damage to the ecosystem.

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)0.001
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 score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score0.131

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations21
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLandSame topicLand Use and Ecosystem ServicesFrench-language works237,207