MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2883403996 · doi:10.1055/s-0038-1644909

Evaluating the extinction risk of Ligusticum canbyi (Osha): Using the IUCN Red List

2018· article· en· W2883403996 on OpenAlexaffabout
HL Moothoo, DJ Leaman, WL Applequist, PN Brown

Bibliographic record

VenuePlanta Medica International Open · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBotany, Ecology, and Taxonomy Studies
Canadian institutionsCanadian Museum of NatureBritish Columbia Institute of Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIUCN Red ListThreatened speciesConservation-dependent speciesData deficientConservation statusExtinction (optical mineralogy)Near-threatened speciesGeographyEcologyHabitatPopulationEnvironmental resource managementBiologyEnvironmental scienceDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List of threatened species is a global inventory of the conservation status of biological species. IUCN's Species Information Service database enables application of standardized criteria and thresholds to available species data to evaluate the risk of extinction. The IUCN Red List highlights species that are threatened with extinction thereby prioritizing and guiding conservation efforts by governments and local organizations. Ligusticum canbyi J.M. Coult. & Rose (Apiaceae) is found growing in high altitude habitats in the Pacific Northwest and was traditionally used by First Nations to alleviate symptoms associated with colds. Harvesting pressures due to current market demand and cultivation challenges on L. porteri, a closely related species found in the United States may extend wild-crafting collection practices to L. canbyi populations. Distribution records for L. canbyi were obtained from herbarium databases in the US and Canada and the extent of occurrence and area of occupancy were calculated using a geospatial assessment tool. Results show L. canbyi qualifies as Vulnerable based on criteria and thresholds for geographic range measurements only. Results obtained should be collated with additional metrics on population size reduction, habitat quality and potential exploitation of wild populations obtained from sources across political boundaries to provide a more comprehensive assessment.

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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.126
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.225 · 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlanta Medica International OpenSame topicBotany, Ecology, and Taxonomy StudiesFrench-language works237,207