Metapopulation Dynamics of Endangered Amphibians in Fragmented Wetland Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Habitat fragmentation is one of the major threats to global amphibian extinctions, particularly for low-dispersal wetland-dependent species. The research questions this study seeks to answer is the metapopulation dynamics of threatened amphibians in a fragmented wetland landscape, and to assess the effects of patch isolation, size, and patch connectivity on patch occupancy, colonization, and extinction. The surveys were conducted across 48 wetlands over 5 years (2019-2024), with mark-recapture and environmental DNA (eDNA) sampling used to estimate population parameters. Using a spatially explicit metapopulation model, a mean patch occupancy of 0.62 ± 0.08 (SE) across the study period was found, with annual colonization and extinction probabilities of 0.27 and 0.19, respectively. The wetland size was strongly positively correlated with occupancy (β = 0.41, p < 0.001), and the isolation distance negatively affected colonization rates (β = -0.36, p = 0.004). The occupancy patterns (R2) were explained by connectivity indices (R2 = 0.58). It is important to note that wetlands within 500m of neighboring patches had a 34% greater chance of persistence than those in more isolated regions. Simulation results suggested that a 20% improvement in linkage would decrease the likelihood of extinction by about 15% over 10 years. On the other hand, a further loss of habitat at the current rate of destruction (about 3%/year) is expected to reduce the overall metapopulation's viability by 40% in 15 years. Such results underscore the vital role of preserving functional connectivity and of focusing on larger habitat patches in conservation planning. Endangered amphibian species require strategic restoration of wetland corridors and mitigation of fragmentation effects to improve future persistence in evolving landscapes.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".