MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4362574968 · doi:10.1111/csp2.12924

Prioritizing ecological restoration of converted lands in Canada by spatially integrating organic carbon storage and biodiversity benefits

2023· article· en· W4362574968 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueConservation Science and Practice · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Management and Policy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British ColumbiaUniversity of VictoriaMcMaster UniversityWorld Wildlife Fund Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiodiversityEnvironmental scienceRestoration ecologyEcosystem servicesWetlandEcosystemEnvironmental resource managementClimate changeCarbon sequestrationForest restorationGeographyEcologyForest ecologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Ecosystem restoration is a fundamental way of delivering nature‐based solutions to improve resilience in a changing climate and sustain biodiversity. Spatial analyses to identify where ecosystem restoration would yield targeted environmental benefits are critical to inform, and coordinate restoration initiatives at multiple scales to achieve national commitments and global goals. Here, we provide an optimization analysis for restoration potential of converted terrestrial ecosystems in Canada by integrating carbon storage and biodiversity benefits as key considerations. Our results show that converted landscapes are prevalent in southern anthropic regions of Canada, with the greatest potential for biodiversity benefits through forest and grassland restoration. At national scales, carbon density (tonnes C/km 2 ) and total carbon storage (tonnes C) potential were greatest for wetland and forest restoration, respectively. When biodiversity and carbon were both included in an optimization framework, consistent priorities across all three restoration targets (50,000; 100,000; and 150,000 km 2 ) comprised forest restoration in the St. Lawrence and Lake Erie Lowlands, with the Lake Manitoba Plains, Interlake Plains, and Manitoulin‐Lake Simcoe ecoregions also frequently identified. Our analysis will help decision‐makers identify where restoration of converted lands may support considerable gains in simultaneously achieving climate and biodiversity goals in Canada.

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.

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.411

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.221 · 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