PROCEEDINGS OF THE 40th ANNUAL MEETING Canadian Society of En vironmental Biolo gists KEYNOTE: Species at Risk- Amphibians and Other Life on the Edge in British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There are many human activities that put species at risk, including development, agriculture, and forestry. Risk is not simply a linear function of habitat loss, and species reach thresholds where risk increases exponentially. The most threatened groups of organisms in Canada are the amphibians and reptiles, with over 30 % of their species at risk. Three sets of studies of amphibians at risk in British Columbia will be used to explore the threats and possible solutions for endangered species, especially in riparian areas. 1) The tailed frog and Pacific giant salamander are two stream-associated species that are considered to be at risk due to forest harvesting. In particular, fine sediment washed into streams appears to be the greatest threat. Our studies show that the impact of land use on these two species varies depending upon the geographic setting, such that steep streams and those draining high elevation watersheds may be at less risk than other streams. 2) The tiger salamander is a widely distributed species, but the subspecies found in BC is considered threatened. The habitats used by this species in the south Okanagan are being lost to development and agriculture. 3) The Oregon spotted frog is Canada’s most endangered amphibian and occurs at low densities in only three isolated locations. Efforts for recovery of this frog, like many other species at risk, are limited by large-scale elimination of habitat. Amphibians are sensitive to changes in either of their habitats and provide a good indicator of ecosystem condition since they cross the edges of both aquatic and terrestrial habitats. These three cases illustrate many of the issues for conservation efforts and the variety of habitats at risk.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.363 | 0.120 |
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".