Amphibians and Reptiles Resources in Liupanshan National Nature Reserve,Ningxia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since the establishment of Ningxia Liupanshan nature reserve,there were few reports concern on the survey of amphibians and reptiles. In order to master the status of background resources of amphibians and reptiles and evaluate the biological diversity of this nature reserve,the resources of amphibians and reptiles in the nature reserve were investigated for seven times from July,2011 to July,2013. Combined with the documented literatures,there are 14 species of amphibians and reptiles,belonging to 2 orders,7 families and 9 genera,accounts for 50. 0%( 28) of amphibians and reptiles of Ningxia; among of which,there are 5 amphibians,belonging to 1 orders,3 families and 4 genera,accounts for 71. 4%( 7) of amphibians of Ningxia,and 9 reptiles,belonging to 4 families and 5 genera,accounts for 43. 8%( 21) of reptiles of Ningxia. Amphibians and reptiles species of the nature reserve are mainly Palearctic realm species( 8) and cosmopolitan species( 5),as well as 1 oriental realm species. After compare the fauna similarity( AFR) to the neighboring nature reserve,we found there is regular replacing phenomenon in different nature reserves with latitudinal rising.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".