MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2609231888 · doi:10.1111/geb.12589

Estimating regional species richness: The case of China's vascular plant species

2017· article· en· W2609231888 on OpenAlexafffund
Muyang Lu, Fangliang He

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Ecology and Biogeography · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaSun Yat-sen University
KeywordsSpecies richnessVascular plantChinaEcologyBiodiversityGeographyTaxonPlant speciesEndemismBiologyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Aim The estimation of regional species richness has been a major challenge in ecology but is crucial for setting up conservation priorities. Discovery curves are a principal tool for estimating regional richness, but they have been criticized for being too sensitive to historical fluctuations in species discovery. In this study we propose a new discovery model that considers historical influences. We have applied the model to estimate the number of vascular plant species in China, a country of mega‐biodiversity that has also suffered endless wars and social turmoil in its modern history. Location China. Time period 1755–2000. Major taxa studied Vascular plant species. Methods We compiled the discovery time for each vascular species from the complete volumes ofFlora of China, leading to 31,220 valid species names. We applied our model to these data and compared the performance of our model with existing discovery models and two other methods (species–area relationships and a taxonomic rank curve model). We also tested our model with three other independent datasets and one simulation study. Results Our new method estimated there to be 36,554 (± 2,708) vascular plant species in China. Our model accounted very well for the effect of historical events and was robust to different periods of data that were used to estimate the total richness. Our model outperformed all other models that were compared. We found that 5,334 species remained to be discovered in China and it would take about 50 years to discover all the species should the current discovery rate of 110 species per year persist. Main conclusions Species discovery curves, with historical effects being properly accounted for, offer a promising tool for estimating regional species richness. Our model is robust to the effect of historical events and provides by far the most accurate and reliable estimates of species richness of test data, including vascular plant richness in China.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score0.137

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations24
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Ecology and BiogeographySame topicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics StudiesFrench-language works237,207