Are Modern Biological Invasions an Unprecedented Form of Global Change?
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The uniqueness of the current, global mass invasion by nonindigenous species has been challenged recently by researchers who argue that modern rates and consequences of nonindigenous species establishment are comparable to episodes in the geological past. Although there is a fossil record of species invasions occurring in waves after geographic barriers had been lifted, such episodic events differ markedly from human-assisted invasions in spatial and temporal scales and in the number and diversity of organisms involved in long-distance dispersal. Today, every region of the planet is simultaneously affected and modern rates of invasion are several orders of magnitude higher than prehistoric rates. In terms of its rate and geographical extent, its potential for synergistic disruption and the scope of its evolutionary consequences, the current mass invasion event is without precedent and should be regarded as a unique form of global change. Prehistoric examples of biotic interchanges are nonetheless instructive and can increase our understanding of species-area effects, evolutionary effects, biotic resistance to invasion, and the impacts of novel functional groups introduced to naïve biotas. Nevertheless, they provide only limited insight into the synergistic effects of invasions and other environmental stressors, the effect of frequent introductions of large numbers of propagules, and global homogenization, all of which characterize the current mass invasion event.
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.
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 it