A Re-Assessment of Priority Amphibian Species of Peru
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Peru supports approximately 588 amphibian species, of which 492 have been assessed on the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Of these, 111 are classified as Threatened, with 69 species classified as Critically Endangered or Endangered. In addition, 140 amphibian species remain Data Deficient. We re-assessed the conservation status of 38 amphibian species originally identified as potentially Threatened by von May et al. (2008), using the IUCN Red List Categories and Criteria. Fourteen species assessments changed as a result of re-assessment, of which eight changed from Data Deficient to Threatened; two changed from Data Deficient to Near Threatened and Least Concern respectively; two were up-listed from Least Concern to a Threatened status; two were down-listed. None of the changes were due to a known genuine change since the previous assessment. All changes were justified by an increase in knowledge. The eight species with a change from Data Deficient to a Threatened category belonged to four anuran families: Craugastoridae, Dendrobatidae, Hemiphractidae and Telmatobiidae. The reasons for a change in assessment status were: changes in taxonomy, distribution, population status, threat status, or previously incorrect information. The main threat affecting re-assessed amphibian species was habitat loss, with other threats including pollution, disease outbreaks, and collection for the pet trade. Only 53% of the re-assessed species were found to occur in a protected area. Findings of this study indicate the continuing fragility of many Peruvian amphibians and highlight the need for improving their protection and for further research into their population status and threats.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".