Cultural keystone species and their role in biocultural conservation
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Biocultural diversity is declining globally. Cultural keystone species (CKS) are one promising pathway by which biocultural approaches to conservation, which seek to protect both biological and cultural diversity, might be implemented in practice. We traced the evolution of the CKS concept in relation to Indigenous Peoples in the Canadian context through a scoping review of the literature from 2000 to 2021 and nine in‐depth interviews with Indigenous Guardians and knowledge holders. Emergent themes in this scoping review indicate that CKS, rather than being viewed as objects for conservation, can be understood as ongoing relationship(s) between the cultural and ecological, which are intimately tied to language, knowledge, practices, and places in ways that are deeply interconnected. One cannot protect CKS, therefore, without also protecting the relationships that people (or groups of people) have to that species. We conclude by recommending further investment in policies and programs that support enabling mechanisms for Indigenous Peoples to maintain, manage, and restore relationships with CKS.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it