Areal sizes of high, intermediate, low and total suitable habitats are correlated to the global extinction risk for mammals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The relationships between areal sizes of high, intermediate, low, and total sum of habitats with low, intermediate and high suitability habitat ranges, and the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) threatened status of global terrestrial mammals were studied. Polyserial correlation analysis showed that all types of areal size closely and positively correlated with IUCN categories of threatened species. The results indicate that area-based extinction risk assessment is feasible and reliable in species? conservation prioritization. Furthermore, the partial polyserial correlation test indicates that significant correlations between the IUCN threatened status of species and range sizes of high, intermediate and low suitability habitats are not influenced by the polyserial correlation between IUCN threatened status and total suitability habitat range size. Thus, the prediction of species? extinction risks can be accurately fulfilled by evaluating the areal size of any one of total, high, intermediate or low suitability ranges. The present study implies that if the area size information of a totally suitable range is not available for species? extinction risk assessment, the usage of areal sizes from any parts of suitable habitats (high, intermediate or low) are effective surrogates.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".