The ties that bind the sagebrush biome: integrating genetic connectivity into range-wide conservation of greater sage-grouse
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Conserving genetic connectivity is fundamental to species persistence, yet rarely is made actionable into spatial planning for imperilled species. Climate change and habitat degradation have added urgency to embrace connectivity into networks of protected areas. Our two-step process integrates a network model with a functional connectivity model, to identify population centres important to maintaining genetic connectivity then to delineate those pathways most likely to facilitate connectivity thereamong for the greater sage-grouse ( Centrocercus urophasianus ), a species of conservation concern ranging across eleven western US states and into two Canadian provinces. This replicable process yielded spatial action maps, able to be prioritized by importance to maintaining range-wide genetic connectivity. We used these maps to investigate the efficacy of 3.2 million ha designated as priority areas for conservation (PACs) to encompass functional connectivity. We discovered that PACs encompassed 41.1% of cumulative functional connectivity—twice the amount of connectivity as random—and disproportionately encompassed the highest-connectivity landscapes. Comparing spatial action maps to impedances to connectivity such as cultivation and woodland expansion allows both planning for future management and tracking outcomes from past efforts.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".