Moving from a regional to a continental perspective of Phragmites australis invasion in North America
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: We use a regional comparison of Phragmites australis (common reed) subsp. americanus, P. australis subsp. berlandieri and introduced P. australis (possibly five sublineages) in the Chesapeake Bay, the St Lawrence River, Utah and the Gulf Coast to inform a North American perspective on P. australis invasion patterns, drivers, impacts and research needs. FINDINGS AND RESEARCH NEEDS: Our regional assessments reveal substantial diversity within and between the three main lineages of P. australis in terms of mode of reproduction and the types of environment occupied. For introduced P. australis, the timing of introduction also differed between the regions. Nevertheless, a common finding in these regions reinforces the notion that introduced P. australis is opportunistic and thrives in disturbed habitats. Thus, we expect to see substantial expansion of introduced P. australis with increasing anthropogenic disturbances in each of these regions. Although there have been some studies documenting the negative impacts of introduced P. australis, it also plays a beneficial role in some regions, and in some cases, the purported negative impacts are unproven. There is also a broader need to clarify the genetic and ecological relationships between the different introduced sublineages observed in North America, and their relative competitive ability and potential for admixture. This may be done through regional studies that use similar methodologies and share results to uncover common patterns and processes. To our knowledge, such studies have not been performed on P. australis in spite of the broad attention given to this species. Such research could advance theoretical knowledge on biological invasion by helping to determine the extent to which the patterns observed can be generalized or are sublineage specific or region specific. SYNTHESIS: Given what appears to be sometimes idiosyncratic invasion patterns when interpreted in isolation in the regions that we analysed, it may be time to consider initiatives on a continental (if not intercontinental) scale to tackle unresolved issues about P. australis.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".