Bibliographic record
Abstract
Landscape Ecology - the Science or the Research Field? In the recent decades, the tendency promoting team research and interdisciplinary studies has been increasingly visible in natural sciences. More and more significant publications have been works by many authors representing different research orientations. At least to some extent, such a tendency can be seen as a response to growing specialisation and loss of connection not only between specialised scientific disciplines but also between subdisciplines of a given science or one system of sciences. Comprehensive studies of the natural systems are also stimulated by the increasing threat posed by adverse changes which take place in the natural world not only on the local and regional scale but above all in the global dimension. In view of the growing globalisation of social and economic processes, globalisation of threats to the natural environment is also more and more present in the debate. This in turn implies the need for extensive studies and discussions between specialists representing various research orientations. The term ‘landscape ecology’ was introduced by Carl Troll in the late 1930s. He proposed that the fundamental task of this discipline be the functional analysis of the landscape contents as well as explanation of its multiple and varying interrelations. Later Troll modified the definition of landscape ecology by referring toTansley’sconceptofecosystem.He wrote that landscape ecology is a science dealing with the system of interconnections between biocenoses and their environmental conditions in definitesegmentsoflandscape. Troll’s concepts however did not attract a lot of interest among the academic community. The heyday of landscape ecology came in the 1970s. In 1972 the Society for Landscape Ecology was established in the Netherlands. In 1981 the Society organised an international conference entitled “Prospects of Landscape Ecology”, held in Vendhoven. Initiated by Ružicka, a series of seminars on landscape and ecological issues was held in Slovakia (altogether 14 in the years 1967–2006). 1976 saw the first textbook, written by Leser and entitled Landschaftsőkologie . All these initiatives set the ground for establishing an international organisation, which was done in 1982, when, in the town of Pieŝt’any (Slovakia), the International Association for Landscape Ecology (IALE) came into being. The rapid development of integrated studies on the natural environment took place in the years following World War II and was undoubtedly influenced by the demand associated with economic practice. This development was particularly robust in the two German states and in Russia. Apart from European academic centres, comprehensive natural environment studies were also developing in Australia and later in Canada. Today, research in landscape ecology issues is conducted virtually in all countries of Europe and North America. In Poland, 1988 saw the establishment of the Ecological Club of the Polish Geographical Society which was the Polish branch of IALE, and in 1993 the Polish Association for Landscape Ecology (PAEK) was registered. There exist distinct differences in the way landscape ecology is understood in Europe and North America, which derive from both traditions and the nature of the research object. The development and popularity of landscape ecology is confirmed by many publications, which include – in addition to Leser’s textbook referred to above – the foundamental work by Naveh and Lieberman entitled: Landscape Ecology. Theory and Application . The periodical Landscape Ecology , indexed in the Philadelphia list, has been published since 1987. In the textbook authored by Richling and Solon (1994), we can find the statement that landscape ecology is a separate discipline of science, and its unique characteristic is that it approaches the object of research in a comprehensive and integral manner, and the object of research also involves man and results of human activity and is treated in the structural, functional and visual aspects. Today, such a tenet calls for a reformulation. More and more frequently, landscape ecology is treated as a research field which brings to get her specialists representing various scientific disciplines. The term “landscape ecology” incorporates various kinds of research which can also include components of landscape. What can be said about the future of landscape ecology? It will probably remain the research field which will bring together researchers with varied academic backgrounds and interests in the issues concerning natural systems and relationships between them and anthropogenic activity. This in turn may imply the risk that the term “landscape ecology” will vanish, which is even more likely because the present situation may stimulate the development of new directions in interdisciplinary studies. This is accompanied by a growing social demand for such problem solutions that can be applied in economic practice, as well as a good climate for regional studies
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".