MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411447755 · doi:10.1111/cobi.70089

Community‐informed and codesigned research to understand the impacts of railways on wildlife

2025· article· en· W4411447755 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Kim Vincent, Jacqueline D. Litzgus, S. Kell, Cory Kozmik, Angela Belleau, Jesse N. Popp

Bibliographic record

VenueConservation Biology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife-Road Interactions and Conservation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphMount Allison UniversityAssembly of First NationsLaurentian University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsWildlifeGeographyCitizen scienceWildlife tradeIndigenousWildlife conservationTaxonEcologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Trains cause mortalities of several animal species, but the ecological impacts of railways are understudied. Most research on wildlife-train collisions has focused on large mammals, but understanding railway-specific risks for underrepresented taxa, especially vulnerable species, is important for developing effective mitigation strategies. Based on the concerns and interests of 2 Anishinaabek communities-Shawanaga First Nation (SFN) and Magnetawan First Nation (MFN)-we collaboratively aimed to fill knowledge gaps with a community-informed approach in which Indigenous knowledge (IK) and Western science were used to investigate wildlife interactions with railways bisecting the 2 Traditional Territories in Ontario, Canada. To inform study design, First Nation community members were invited to share knowledge concerning wildlife-railway impacts in semistructured interviews. Weekly walking surveys were conducted in 3 field seasons along two 3.6-km sections of railway in SFN and MFN during which locations of all wildlife observed alive or dead were recorded. We also deployed game cameras at 500-m intervals along the railway survey areas. On walking surveys, we recorded 462 observations of individuals from 42 species, of which 76% were found dead. These findings complemented the shared IK that railways affect a wide variety of wildlife, often causing mortalities. Reptiles and amphibians were the most severely affected taxa, accounting for 87% of observed mortalities. Seven species at risk of extinction interacted with the railway, including 3 turtle species and one snake species, all of which were found dead on the railway tracks. Cameras recorded 43 wildlife species; most detections were of large and medium mammals, suggesting they frequently interact with the railway but may face lower mortality risks than herpetofauna in our study area. Ultimately, our study highlights the holistic outcomes that are possible through collaborative research that embraces complementary knowledge systems and indicates that reptile and amphibian populations may be particularly susceptible to railway mortality.

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 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)0.001
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 score0.395
Threshold uncertainty score0.439

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueConservation BiologySame topicWildlife-Road Interactions and ConservationFrench-language works237,207