Increasing rate of species discovery in sharks coincides with sharp population declines: implications for biodiversity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The global biodiversity of some taxonomic groups is poorly described, but thought to be decreasing rapidly. Surprisingly, this holds for a group of the world's most iconic large‐bodied animals: sharks. Our analysis shows rapid and steep contemporary population declines in sharks coinciding with an increasing rate in species discovery. Larger sharks occupying lower trophic positions with wide geographic distributions (latitudinal ranges) found in shallow waters tend to be discovered first. In light of this increasing trend in species discovery and a cumulative description record far from reaching an asymptote, models cannot predict the global number of sharks. Our results highlight that while our knowledge of shark diversity improves at an accelerating rate, this diversity is under threat and declining rapidly; most shark species are vulnerable to declines, especially smaller‐bodied sharks. This surprising finding may relate to mesopredator declines following periods of rapid expansion due to the demise of large sharks (apex predators). Furthermore, shark population declines are structured by phylogeny and, to a lesser extent, geography. Decline in sharks are likely to influence other species as well, e.g. via trophic cascades. The net result may be a greater loss of biodiversity in the oceans and could potentially explain why fewer extinction events are observed than predicted by models. Likewise, it is not inconceivable that species may be lost prior to their discovery.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".