Code and initial metapopulation data for model construction and simulation analyses for: Genetic rescue from protected areas is modulated by migration, hunting rate and timing of harvest
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Migrants from protected areas may buffer the risk of harvest-induced evolutionary changes in exploited populations that face strong selective harvest pressures in both terrestrial and marine ecosystems. Understanding the mechanisms favouring genetic rescue through migration could help ensure sustainable harvest outside protected areas and conserve genetic diversity inside those areas. We developed a stochastic individual-based metapopulation model to evaluate the potential for migration from protected areas to mitigate the evolutionary consequences of selective harvest. We parameterized the model with detailed data from individual monitoring of two populations of bighorn sheep subjected to trophy hunting. We tracked horn length through time in a metapopulation including large protected and trophy-hunted populations connected through male breeding migrations. We quantified and compared declines in horn length and rescue potential under various combinations of migration rate, hunting rate in hunted areas and temporal overlap in timing of harvest and migrations, which affects the migrants' survival and chances to breed within exploited areas. Our simulations suggest that the effects of size-selective harvest on male horn length in hunted populations can be dampened or avoided if harvest pressure is low, migration rate is substantial, and migrants have a low risk of being shot. Intense size-selective harvest impacts the phenotypic and genetic diversity in horn length, and population structure through changes in proportions of large-horned males, sex ratio and age structure. When hunting pressure is high and overlaps with male migrations, effects of selective removal also emerge in the protected population, so that instead of a genetic rescue of hunted populations, our model predicts undesirable effects inside protected areas. Our results stress the importance of a metapopulational approach to management, to promote genetic rescue from protected areas and limit ecological and evolutionary impacts of harvest on both harvested and protected populations.
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 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.147 | 0.026 |
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".