Data from: Assessing cumulative impacts of forest development on the distribution of furbearers using expert-based habitat modeling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cumulative impacts of anthropogenic landscape change must be considered when managing and conserving wildlife habitat. Across the central-interior of British Columbia, Canada, industrial activities are altering the habitat of furbearer species. This region has witnessed unprecedented levels of anthropogenic landscape change following rapid development in a number of resource sectors, particularly forestry. Our objective was to create expert-based habitat models for three furbearer species: fisher (Pekania pennanti), Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis), and American marten (Martes americana) and quantify habitat change for those species. We recruited 10 biologist and 10 trapper experts and then used the analytical hierarchy process to elicit expert knowledge of habitat variables important to each species. We applied the models to reference landscapes (i.e., registered traplines) in two distinct study areas and then quantified the change in habitat availability from 1990 to 2013. There was strong agreement between expert groups in the choice of habitat variables and associated scores. Where anthropogenic impacts had increased considerably over the study period, the habitat models showed substantial declines in habitat availability for each focal species (78% decline in optimal fisher habitat, 83% decline in optimal lynx habitat, and 79% decline in optimal marten habitat). For those traplines with relatively little forest harvesting, the habitat models showed no substantial change in the availability of habitat over time. The results suggest that habitat for these three furbearer species declined significantly as a result of the cumulative impacts of forest harvesting. Results of this study illustrate the utility of expert knowledge for understanding large-scale patterns of habitat change over long time periods.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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".