MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2138158236 · doi:10.1017/s146479310100584x

The biology of impact craters — a review

2002· review· en· W2138158236 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Charles S. Cockell, Pascal Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueBiological reviews/Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2002
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicPlanetary Science and Exploration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImpact craterEcologyEcological successionEcosystemImpact structureClimaxEphemeral keyEarth scienceHabitatGeologyEnvironmental scienceAstrobiologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Impact craters contain ecosystems that are often very different from the ecosystems that surround them. On Earth over 150 impact craters have been identified in a wide diversity of biomes. All natural events that can cause localized disruption of ecosystems have quite distinct patterns of rccovery. Impact events are unique in that they are the only extraterrestrial mechanism capable of disrupting an ecosystem locally in space and time. Thus, elucidating the chronological sequence of change at the sites of impacts is of ecological interest. In this synthetic review we use the existing literature, coupled with our own observations at the Haughton impact structure, Devon Island, Nunavut, Canada to consider the patterns of biological recovery at the site of impact craters and the ecological characteristics of impact craters. Three phases of recovery are suggested. The Phase of Thermal Biology, a phase associated with the localized, ephemeral thermal anomaly generated by an impact event. The Phase of Impact Succession and Climax, a phase marked by multiple primary and secondary succession events both in the aquatic realm (impact crater-lakes) and terrestrial realm (colonization of paleolacustrine deposits and impact-generated substrata) that are followed by periods of climax ecology. In the case of large-scale impact events (> 10(4) Mt), this latter phase may also be influenced by successional changes in the global environment. Finally, during the Phase of Ecological Assimilation, the disappearance of the surface geological expression of an impact structure results in a concomitant loss of ecological distinctiveness. In extreme cases, the impact structure is buried. Impact succession displays similarities and differences to succession following other agents of ecological disturbance, particularly volcanism.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.201
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.170 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations111
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiological reviews/Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical SocietySame topicPlanetary Science and ExplorationFrench-language works237,207