MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2293080938 · doi:10.1111/fme.12147

Risk screening of non‐native freshwater fishes in <scp>C</scp>roatia and <scp>S</scp>lovenia using the <scp>F</scp>ish <scp>I</scp>nvasiveness <scp>S</scp>creening <scp>K</scp>it

2016· article· en· W2293080938 on OpenAlexaff
Marina Piria, Meta Povž, Lorenzo Vilizzi, Davor Zanella, Predrag Simonović, Gordon H. Copp

Bibliographic record

VenueFisheries Management and Ecology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsTrent University
FundersDepartment for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, UK GovernmentSveučilište u Zagrebu
KeywordsCatfishBiologyFish <Actinopterygii>FisheryInvasive speciesEcologyZoology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Fish Invasiveness Screening Kit ( FISK ) version 2 was used to assess the invasiveness potential of 40 introduced and translocated freshwater fish species to Croatia and Slovenia. Based on a priori classification of invasiveness, receiver operating characteristic analysis of FISK scores from two independent assessors resulted in a statistically significant calibration threshold of 11.75. This indicated that FISK was able to discriminate reliably between non‐native species likely to pose a high risk of being invasive and those likely to pose a medium or low risk of invasiveness. Seven species were categorised as ‘medium risk’ and the other 33 as ‘high risk’, whereas no species was categorised as ‘low risk’. The two highest scoring species were European catfish Silurus glanis and North African catfish Clarias gariepinus . Mean scores for all species classified a priori as invasive were ranked as ‘high risk’ sensu lato and fell into the ‘moderately high risk’ subcategory. FISK proved to be a valid tool for assessing the risks posed by non‐native fishes in Croatia and Slovenia. For this reason, it can be adopted as a reliable tool for the prevention of new translocations or introductions of potentially invasive species in the risk assessment area, as well as to assist in decisions regarding future management (i.e. monitoring, control and eradication) and conservation strategies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.199 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations53
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFisheries Management and EcologySame topicFish Ecology and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207