Testing the grouper biocontrol hypothesis: A response to Mumby et al. 2013
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Biotic resistance is the idea that native species negatively affect the invasion success of introduced species. We tested the hypothesis that native grouper are controlling the abundance of exotic lionfish on Caribbean coral reefs by assessing the relationship between the density and biomass of lionfish and native predators at 71 reefs in three biogeographic regions. Our results indicated that: (a) the abundance of lionfish and large grouper are not negatively related, and (b) lionfish abundance is controlled by a number of physical site characteristics, and possibly by culling. Taken together, our results suggest that managers cannot rely on native grouper populations to control the lionfish invasion. Mumby et al. (2013) objected to several aspects of our analysis and conclusions. Here we address their criticisms and argue that our original conclusions are valid.
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 | 0.100 | 0.327 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
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".