MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7002134910

Measuring urban edge effects and its impact on restoration potential in Rouge National Urban Park

2024· dissertation· en· W7002134910 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueUWSpace (University of Waterloo) · 2024
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWildlife-Road Interactions and Conservation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTransectNational parkMetropolitan areaUrban forestHabitatSpecies evennessWildlife corridorUrban ecologyBelt transectNeighbourhood (mathematics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Urban development is a driving force behind habitat fragmentation and biodiversity loss in major metropolitan areas. While greenspaces and naturalized areas can provide resources for wildlife, urban areas are organized in such a way that the transition from forest to suburban neighbourhood is abrupt and heavily maintained. This arrangement in conjunction with the intensity of urban activities leaves a limited area to buffer any anthropogenic impacts, negatively affecting species that are unable to adapt. To examine the extent to which urban activities are affecting naturalized areas, a one-sided edge effect study was conducted in Rouge National Urban Park (RNUP) in Toronto, Ontario, Canada. The purpose of this study was to frame what kinds of restoration plans might be possible given the amount of least impacted area, i.e., interior conditions. Data were collected in the largest accessible forest fragment, with one primary edge being sampled. 13 transects of 500 m length were used, with samples taken at the following distances d from the edge: 0 m, 50 m, 125 m, 250 m, and 500 m. Reference conditions were categorized as those found at d = 500 m. The Shannon Diversity Index and Pielou Evenness Index were used to compare plant species composition and analyzed using a randomized test of edge influence without blocking. The distance of edge influence was not observable, with no distance found to be significantly different from reference conditions. The results may be due to data noise from other nearby edges, primarily a large informal trail network whose presence was not known prior to data collection. Had these additional sources of fragmentation been observed, it would have resulted in smaller sampling fragments with inherently less potential interior habitat. It may also be the result of non-typical urban edge conditions at d = 0 m as it ran parallel to metal fencing and lay beneath a mature canopy. The edge had a sheltered side-canopy in contrast to an expected open forest edge that is exposed to disturbances such as increased light exposure and heavy anthropogenic activity. Additional observations may indicate limited interior conditions in the studied area of RNUP. Though not examined specifically, evidence of anthropogenic impacts was not contained to the defined fragment edges and permeated every area of the park. Given how impacted RNUP appears to be, improvements to ecological integrity seem unlikely unless accompanied by a broader landscape approach. Restoration activities may help reduce further biodiversity loss and bolster other ecosystem services provided by the park. Due to the complexity of potential influencing factors, this research is the beginnings of a foundational framework that sought to better understand priorities and best practices for ecological restoration in major urban areas. Subsequent research is expected to develop a deeper understanding of the drivers behind observed edge conditions.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.839
Threshold uncertainty score0.321

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUWSpace (University of Waterloo)Same topicWildlife-Road Interactions and ConservationFrench-language works237,207