MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4311869263 · doi:10.1101/2022.12.15.520573

Logging alters tropical forest structure, while conversion to agriculture reduces biodiversity and functioning

2022· preprint· en· W4311869263 on OpenAlexaff
Charles J. Marsh, Edgar C. Turner, Benjamin Blonder, Boris Bongalov, Sabine Both, Rudi Cruz, Dafydd Elias, David Hemprich‐Bennett, Palasiah Jotan, Victoria Kemp, Ully H. Kritzler, Sol Milne, David T. Milodowski, Simon L. Mitchell, Milenka Montoya Pillco, Matheus Henrique Nunes, Terhi Riutta, Samuel J. B. Robinson, Eleanor M. Slade, Henry Bernard, David F. R. P. Burslem, Arthur Y. C. Chung, Elizabeth L. Clare, David A. Coomes, Zoe G. Davies, David P. Edwards, David Johnson, Pavel Kratina, Yadvinder Malhi, Noreen Majalap, Reuben Nilus, Nick Ostle, Stephen J. Rossiter, Matthew J. Struebig, Joseph A. Tobias, Mathew Williams, Robert M. Ewers, Owen T. Lewis, Glen Reynolds, Yit Arn Teh, Andy Hector

Bibliographic record

VenuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory) · 2022
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersNatural Environment Research CouncilSight Research UK
KeywordsLoggingBiodiversityTropical forestAgroforestryEnvironmental scienceGeographyEcologyForestryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The impacts of degradation and deforestation on tropical forests are poorly understood, particularly at landscape scales. We present an extensive ecosystem analysis of the impacts of logging and conversion of tropical forest to oil palm from a large-scale study in Borneo, synthesizing responses from 82 variables categorized into four ecological levels spanning a broad suite of ecosystem properties: 1) structure and environment, 2) species traits, 3) biodiversity, and 4) ecosystem functions. Responses were highly heterogeneous and often complex and non-linear. Variables that were directly impacted by the physical process of timber extraction, such as soil structure, were sensitive to even moderate amounts of logging, whereas measures of biodiversity and ecosystem functioning were generally resilient to logging but more affected by conversion to oil palm plantation. One-Sentence Summary Logging tropical forest mostly impacts structure while biodiversity and functions are more vulnerable to habitat conversion.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0050.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.175
Teacher spread0.165 · 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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuebioRxiv (Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory)Same topicConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207