MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2586298337 · doi:10.1007/s10530-017-1378-4

Assessing the ecological impacts of invasive species based on their functional responses and abundances

2017· article· en· W2586298337 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Ciaran Laverty, Kyle D. Green, Jaimie T. A. Dick, Daniel Barrios‐O’Neill, Paul J. Mensink, Vincent Médoc, Thierry Spataro, Joe Caffrey, Frances Lucy, Pieter Boets, J. Robert Britton, Josephine Pegg, Cathal T. Gallagher

Bibliographic record

VenueBiological Invasions · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAquatic Invertebrate Ecology and Behavior
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Environment Research CouncilInland Fisheries IrelandOffice National de l’Eau et des Milieux AquatiquesQueen's UniversityAgence Nationale de la RechercheQueen's University BelfastSight Research UK
KeywordsBiologyEcologyInvasive speciesIntroduced speciesRound gobyPredationRelative species abundanceAbundance (ecology)Neogobius

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Invasive species management requires allocation of limited resources towards the proactive mitigation of those species that could elicit the highest ecological impacts. However, we lack predictive capacity with respect to the identities and degree of ecological impacts of invasive species. Here, we combine the relative per capita effects and relative field abundances of invader as compared to native species into a new metric, “Relative Impact Potential” (RIP), and test whether this metric can reliably predict high impact invaders. This metric tests the impact of invaders relative to the baseline impacts of natives on the broader ecological community. We first derived the functional responses (i.e. per capita effects) of two ecologically damaging invasive fish species in Europe, the Ponto-Caspian round goby ( Neogobius melanostomus ) and Asian topmouth gudgeon ( Pseudorasbora parva ), and their native trophic analogues, the bullhead ( Cottus gobio ; also C. bairdi ) and bitterling ( Rhodeus amarus ), towards several prey species. This establishes the existence and relative strengths of the predator–prey relationships. Then, we derived ecologically comparable field abundance estimates of the invader and native fish from surveys and literature. This establishes the multipliers for the above per capita effects. Despite both predators having known severe detrimental field impacts, their functional responses alone were of modest predictive power in this regard; however, incorporation of their abundances relative to natives into the RIP metric gave high predictive power. We present invader/native RIP biplots that provide an intuitive visualisation of comparisons among the invasive and native species, reflecting the known broad ecological impacts of the invaders. Thus, we provide a mechanistic understanding of invasive species impacts and a predictive tool for use by practitioners, for example, in risk assessments.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.294
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.023 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations92
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiological InvasionsSame topicAquatic Invertebrate Ecology and BehaviorFrench-language works237,207