Least‐cost transportation networks predict spatial interaction of invasion vectors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Human-mediated dispersal among aquatic ecosystems often results in biotic transfer between drainage basins. Such activities may circumvent biogeographic factors, with considerable ecological, evolutionary, and economic implications. However, the efficacy of predictions concerning community changes following inter-basin movements are limited, often because the dispersal mechanism is poorly understood (e.g., quantified only partially). To date, spatial-interaction models that predict the movement of humans as vectors of biotic transfer have not incorporated patterns of human movement through transportation networks. As a necessary first step to determine the role of anglers as invasion vectors across a land-lake ecosystem, we investigate their movement potential within Ontario, Canada. To determine possible model improvements resulting from inclusion of network travel, spatial-interaction models were constructed using standard Euclidean (e.g., straight-line) distance measures and also with distances derived from least-cost routing of human transportation networks. Model comparisons determined that least-cost routing both provided the most parsimonious model and also excelled at forecasting spatial interactions, with a proportion of 0.477 total movement deviance explained. The distribution of movements was characterized by many relatively short to medium travel distances (median = 292.6 km) with fewer lengthier distances (75th percentile = 484.6 km, 95th percentile = 775.2 km); however, even the shortest movements were sufficient to overcome drainage-basin boundaries. Ranking of variables in order of their contribution within the most parsimonious model determined that distance traveled, origin outflow, lake attractiveness, and sportfish richness significantly influence movement patterns. Model improvements associated with least-cost routing of human transportation networks imply that patterns of human-mediated invasion are fundamentally linked to the spatial configuration and relative impedance of human transportation networks, placing increased importance on understanding their contribution to the invasion process.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".