MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4396916330 · doi:10.1139/cjfas-2023-0188

Quantifying marine larval dispersal to assess MPA network connectivity and inform future national and transboundary planning efforts

2024· article· en· W4396916330 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
John Cristiani, Emily Rubidge, Patrick L. Thompson, Carolyn K. Robb, Margot Hessing‐Lewis, Mary I. O’Connor

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCoral and Marine Ecosystems Studies
Canadian institutionsTula FoundationUniversity of British ColumbiaFisheries and Oceans Canada
FundersFisheries and Oceans CanadaHakai Institute
KeywordsMarine protected areaBiological dispersalMarine reserveHabitatBiodiversityMarine spatial planningEcologyEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental resource managementGeographyBiologyPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A marine protected area (MPA) network of multiple reserves can protect biodiversity across space, but to be effective, network configuration should support dispersal among MPAs as well as spillover to unprotected habitats. The ability of MPAs to function as an interacting network of populations connected by dispersal, however, is difficult to estimate at broad spatial scales, and therefore, connectivity is often not integrated in MPA design. Here, we simulate passive larval dispersal using a biophysical model to estimate potential transboundary network connectivity of MPAs in western Canada and United States. Drift time was varied to represent generic functional groups of nearshore species with planktonic larvae and sedentary adult stages. We found that MPAs potentially act as an interacting network and meet connectivity design criteria for nearshore invertebrate species, many MPAs (65%–90%) possibly exchange individuals, and a third of larvae from MPAs (25%–32%) source areas of the unprotected coast. This analysis provides a first approximation of multispecies connectivity to inform ongoing transboundary MPA design, and it can be used as a foundation for future model development.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.798
Threshold uncertainty score0.402

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences→Same topicCoral and Marine Ecosystems Studies→French-language works237,207→