MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417121764 · doi:10.1002/pan3.70221

Conservation grounded in traditional ecological knowledge, culture and hunting

2025· article· en· W4417121764 on OpenAlexaff
Fei Wu, Peng Mingsheng, Kong Dejun, Kai Wang, Dong Feng, Robert W. Murphy

Bibliographic record

VenuePeople and Nature · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsRoyal Ontario Museum
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFirewoodSubsistence agricultureIndigenousThreatened speciesDiversity (politics)BushmeatBiodiversityTraditional knowledgeSpecies richness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract For millennia, traditional hunting practices have provided a means of subsistence for numerous indigenous peoples worldwide. Not only do managed traditional hunting practices perpetuate Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK), but they also promote the sustainable utilization of natural resources. However, the contribution of ethnic minority traditional hunting cultures to the conservation of bird diversity remains understudied in China. The Yao people employ a unique ‘bird‐basin’ hunting practice during the migratory season in the Dayao mountains. In order to assess the impact of forest utilization practices on bird diversity, this study compares the bird diversity in the hunting grounds of the Yao people with that in old‐growth forests and in firewood forests. We found a significantly higher level of bird species richness in the hunting grounds than in the old‐growth forests and the firewood forests. Functional diversity and phylogenetic diversity were similar in the old‐growth forests and hunting grounds and were lowest in the firewood forests. Most of the birds captured by bird‐basins were migratory species that were small in size and not threatened . ‘Bird‐basin’ hunting could be an effective way of resolving conflicts between bird diversity conservation and regional economic development. Unlike firewood forests, forests within hunting grounds are proactively and effectively managed by the Yao people and require no external funding. We recommend considering traditional ecological knowledge (TEK) and managed hunting strategies when managing forests outside protected areas, particularly in areas inhabited by indigenous peoples. Read the free Plain Language Summary for this article on the Journal blog.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.219

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePeople and NatureSame topicConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207