MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6894311559 · doi:10.5683/sp3/zvcu0n

Climate adaptation scenarios for a resilient future at University of British Columbia Botanical Garden: Modeling 4 Species of Acer (Maple)

2022· dataset· en· W6894311559 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueBorealis · 2022
Typedataset
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMapleClimate changeVegetation (pathology)Adaptation (eye)Distribution (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As anthropogenic climate change continues to disrupt forests and species’ ecological niches, there is increasing urgency to create plans surrounding adaptation and mitigation for especially vulnerable species. The University of British Columbia’s Botanical Garden (UBCBG) wants to understand species responses to climate change and whether species within their collection will be able to survive in the Garden, given the effects of climate change. One especially important collection UBCBG curates is maple (Acer) trees, currently leading the global consortium of Acer and housing over 50 different species. This study examined the survival probability of four Acer species UBCBG curates including: five-fingered Maple (Acer pentaphyllum Diels), considered critically endangered; paperbark/bloodbark Maple (Acer griseum (Franch.) Pax), considered endangered; bigleaf maple (Acer macrophyllum Pursh), not endangered; and vine maple (Acer circinatum Pursh), not endangered. Maxent, a popular machine-learning algorithm, was used with open-source WorldClim’s 19 bioclimatic variables and provided presence-only occurrence data to conduct species distribution models for each tree species. Each model was evaluated using area under the curve (AUC). AUC scores were considered ‘good’ for each model; A. griseum - 0.95; A. pentaphyllum - 0.877; A. macrophyllum - 0.986; A. circinatum - 0.976. However, future distribution maps contain questionable results due to insufficient field data to inform the model, such as in-field temperature, moisture, elevation, and surrounding vegetation data. Though results can be interpreted as binary regarding whether or not UBCBG will be suitable for each species, they should be taken as preliminary ideas where management plans for mitigation and adaptation can be developed. This study concludes by detailing the importance of field data collection and provides future directions for research that UBCBG may consider when conducting similar analysis.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.258
Threshold uncertainty score0.518

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBorealis→French-language works237,207→