MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7155082399 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.19683365

Biodiversity in India: Present Threats, Conservation Policies and the Role of Indian Legislation

2025· article· W7155082399 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Preeti Verma

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiodiversityIUCN Red ListOverexploitationWildlifeDeforestation (computer science)LegislationHabitat destructionBushmeat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

India is one of the 17 megadiverse countries, hosting approximately 7–8% of all recorded species on just 2.4% of the world’s land area. With four global biodiversity hotspots (Himalaya, Indo-Burma, Western Ghats–Sri Lanka and Sundaland), the country supports over 55,481 plant taxa and 105,244 animal species as of 2024 (Botanical Survey of India, 2025; Zoological Survey of India, 2025). Despite robust legal and policy frameworks, biodiversity faces severe threats from habitat fragmentation, deforestation (18,200 ha of primary humid forest lost in 2024), invasive alien species, pollution, overexploitation and climate change. This manuscript synthesizes the latest data from the Botanical Survey of India (BSI), Zoological Survey of India (ZSI), Global Forest Watch, India State of Forest Report 2023 and IUCN Red List, while critically examining India’s biodiversity-related legislation: the Wildlife (Protection) Act 1972 (as amended 2022), Biological Diversity Act 2002 (Rules 2004 & Amendment 2023), Forest (Conservation) Act 1980 (amended 2023), Environment (Protection) Act 1986, Scheduled Tribes and Other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act 2006 and recent regulations under the Jan Vishwas Act 2023 and Biological Diversity (Access and Benefit Sharing) Regulations 2025 (Government of India). The analysis reveals implementation gaps, judicial interventions and emerging opportunities under the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. Strengthening enforcement, community rights, landscape-level planning and climate-resilient corridors is essential for achieving national targets of protecting 30% of land and water by 2030.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.076

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0040.008
Scholarly communication0.0080.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)Same topicConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207