MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1575665683 · doi:10.1111/nyas.12286

Climate change and species interactions: ways forward

2013· article· en· W1575665683 on OpenAlexaff
Amy L. Angert, Shannon L. LaDeau, Richard S. Ostfeld

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of the New York Academy of Sciences · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSpecies Distribution and Climate Change
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClimate changeEcosystemEnvironmental resource managementEcologyBiotaAbundance (ecology)Environmental scienceComputer scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With ongoing and rapid climate change, ecologists are being challenged to predict how individual species will change in abundance and distribution, how biotic communities will change in structure and function, and the consequences of these climate-induced changes for ecosystem functioning. It is now well documented that indirect effects of climate change on species abundances and distributions, via climatic effects on interspecific interactions, can outweigh and even reverse the direct effects of climate. However, a clear framework for incorporating species interactions into projections of biological change remains elusive. To move forward, we suggest three priorities for the research community: (1) utilize tractable study systems as case studies to illustrate possible outcomes, test processes highlighted by theory, and feed back into modeling efforts; (2) develop a robust analytical framework that allows for better cross-scale linkages; and (3) determine over what time scales and for which systems prediction of biological responses to climate change is a useful and feasible goal. We end with a list of research questions that can guide future research to help understand, and hopefully mitigate, the negative effects of climate change on biota and the ecosystem services they provide.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.673
Threshold uncertainty score0.990

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.194
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.134 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations63
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of the New York Academy of SciencesSame topicSpecies Distribution and Climate ChangeFrench-language works237,207