Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35366029›Full record

ArticleEcological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America2022

Assessing representation of remote sensing derived forest structure and land cover across a network of protected areas.

Evan R Muise, Nicholas C Coops, Txomin Hermosilla, Stephen S Ban

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 27% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Assessing representation of remote sensing derived forest structure and land cover across a network of protected areas.Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America · 2022
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Evan R MuiseDepartment of Forest Resource Management, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, 2424 Main Mall, British Columbia, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-3404-3220
Nicholas C CoopsDepartment of Forest Resource Management, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, 2424 Main Mall, British Columbia, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-0151-9037
Txomin HermosillaCanadian Forest Service (Pacific Forestry Centre), Natural Resources Canada, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-5445-0360
Stephen S BanBC Parks, Ministry of Environment and Climate Change Strategy, Victoria, British Columbia, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-5033-3370
University of British Columbia · CACanadian Forest Service · CAMinistry of Environment, Forests and Climate Change · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Protected areas (PA) are an effective means of conserving biodiversity and protecting suites of valuable ecosystem services. Currently, many nations and international governments use proportional area protected as a critical metric for assessing progress towards biodiversity conservation. However, the areal and other common metrics do not assess the effectiveness of PA networks, nor do they assess how representative PA are of the ecosystems they aim to protect. Topography, stand structure, and land cover are all key drivers of biodiversity within forest environments, and are well-suited as indicators to assess the representation of PA. Here, we examine the PA network in British Columbia, Canada, through drivers derived from freely-available data and remote sensing products across the provincial biogeoclimatic ecosystem classification system. We examine biases in the PA network by elevation, forest disturbances, and forest structural attributes, including height, cover, and biomass by comparing a random sample of protected and unprotected pixels. Results indicate that PA are commonly biased towards high-elevation and alpine land covers, and that forest structural attributes of the park network are often significantly different in protected versus unprotected areas (426 out of 496 forest structural attributes found to be different; p < 0.01). Analysis of forest structural attributes suggests that establishing additional PA could ensure representation of various forest structure regimes across British Columbia's ecosystems. We conclude that these approaches using free and open remote sensing data are highly transferable and can be accomplished using consistent datasets to assess PA representations globally.

Indexed as

Conservation of Natural ResourcesEcosystemBiodiversityBritish ColumbiaForestsRemote Sensing Technologyecological classificationsforest disturbancesforest structureland coverprotected areasremote sensing

Identifiers

PMID35366029
PMCPMC9286433
OpenAlexW4223930765

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.