MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7007708745

Amphibians under stress: life history, density dependence, and differences in vulnerability

2013· dissertation· en· W7007708745 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueSummit (Simon Fraser University) · 2013
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAmphibian and Reptile Biology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSimon Fraser UniversityMinistry of EnvironmentNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research ChairsFulbright Canada
KeywordsAmphibianVulnerability (computing)StressorClimate changeHabitatPopulationVulnerability assessmentEmpirical researchConceptual frameworkHabitat destruction
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Numerous anthropogenic stressors are known drivers of amphibian declines. Nonetheless, research has revealed few lessons for preventing declines in advance of their occurrence. This thesis presents a conceptual framework for identifying when spatial and temporal overlap of density-dependent bottlenecks, life-history traits, and stressors increase decline risk. I evaluated this framework using published empirical amphibian density-dependence data, and found that population dynamics and life-history theory could be useful in prioritizing vulnerability to stressors, though current data deficiencies limit evidence of correlations between these factors. In an experimental test with three frog species, I found that not all species share the same sensitivities to combined climate warming and habitat permanency scenarios. These results suggest larval life-history requirements can influence species’ responses to climate change. Integrating theoretical and empirical tests provides useful tools for estimating species vulnerability and helps identify gaps in our knowledge of the dynamics that govern amphibian responses to stressors.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.185 · 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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSummit (Simon Fraser University)→Same topicAmphibian and Reptile Biology→French-language works237,207→