Mapping climate adaptation corridors for biodiversity—A regional-scale case study in Central America
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Climate adaptation corridors are widely recognized as important for promoting biodiversity resilience under climate change. Central America is part of the Mesoamerican biodiversity hotspot, but there have been no regional-scale analyses of potential climate adaptation corridors in Central America. We identified 2375 potential corridors throughout Central America that link lowland protected areas (≤ 500 m) with intact, high-elevation forests (≥ 1500 m) that represent potential climate change refugia. Whereas we found potential corridors in all Central American countries, potential corridors in Panama, Belize, and Honduras were most protected (medians = 64%, 49%, and 47%, respectively) and potential corridors in El Salvador were least protected (median = 10%). We also developed a corridor priority index based on the ecological characteristics and protected status of potential corridors and their associated start and end points. Compared to low- and medium-priority corridors, high-priority corridors (n = 160; top 7% of all corridors) were generally more protected, forested, and distributed across wider elevational gradients and more Key Biodiversity Areas, but also generally linked larger lowland protected areas to target areas that were larger, more protected, and spanned wider elevational gradients. For example, based on median values, high-priority corridors were 9% more protected and overlapped with 2-3 more Key Biodiversity Areas than low- and medium-priority corridors. Although high-elevation targets spanned considerably wider elevational gradients than lowland protected areas (medians = 695 vs. 142 m, respectively) and thus may be more likely to support refugia, they were considerably smaller than lowland protected areas (medians = 11 vs. 50 km2 respectively) and mostly unprotected (median = 4% protection). This initial, regional assessment can help prioritize locations for finer-scale research, conservation, and restoration activities in support of climate adaptation corridors throughout Central America and highlights the need for greater conservation of potential high-elevation refugia.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".