The ecological effects of a typical housing development on bird species diversity within a forest fragment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Human manipulation of the form and function of landscapes has led to a significant decrease in species diversity in Southern Ontario. To conserve species diversity, it is necessary for landscape architects to understand the ecological effects of the spatial patterns they create. Here, a post occupancy assessment of a typical housing subdivision reveals the ecological effects of its design on a forest fragment in London, Ontario. Prior to development, this fragment within Middlesex County was one of the last remaining upland patches large enough to have interior habitat. Development significantly reduced this interior habitat. The number and composition of bird species were compared, using the same methodology, before and approximately 10 years after development. A greater sampling effort recorded a greater number of bird species, but the composition of the bird community had changed substantially. This result is consistent with observations elsewhere and was predicted by opponents of the subdivision development prior to its development in 1977. The observed number of interior forest specialist species declined, while the observed number of interior-edge and edge generalist species increased--a result that is in keeping with findings published in ecological literature. This study has demonstrated that site-scale design can have a substantial effect upon species diversity at a local scale, which may have implications for conservation at coarser scales. The relationships between the diversity of species and the spatial attributes of the site must be identified and tested if landscape architects are to develop spatial patterns that conserve species diversity.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".