MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3007388209 · doi:10.3389/fevo.2020.00041

Extinction Dynamics Under Extreme Conservation Threat: The Flora of St Helena

2020· article· en· W3007388209 on OpenAlexafffund
Phil Lambdon, Quentin Cronk

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Ecology and Evolution · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBotany, Ecology, and Taxonomy Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaDepartment for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, UK GovernmentUniversity of AlbertaGovernment of the United Kingdom
KeywordsExtinction (optical mineralogy)Extinction probabilityEcologyGeographyFlora (microbiology)Conservation biologyBiologyDemographyPaleontologyPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The flora of the island of St Helena provides an amplified system for the study of extinction by reason of the island’s high endemism, small size, vulnerable biota, length of time of severe disturbance (since 1502) and severity of threats. Endemic plants have been eliminated from 96.5% of St Helena by habitat loss. There are eight recorded extinctions in the vascular flora since 1771 giving an extinction rate of 581 extinctions per million species per year (E/MSY). This is considerably higher than background extinction rates, variously estimated at 1 or 0.1 E/MSY. We have no information for plant extinctions prior to 1771 but applying the same extinction rate to the period 1502 to 1771 suggests that there may be around ten unrecorded historical extinctions. We use census data and population decline estimates to project likely extinction forward in time. The projected overall extinction rate for the next 200 years is somewhat higher at 625 E/MSY. However, our data predict an extinction crunch in the next 50 years with 4 species out of the remaining 48 likely to become extinct during this period. It is interesting that during a period when the native plant areas dropped to 3.5% of the original, the extinction rate appears to have remained shallowly linear with under 30% of the endemic flora becoming extinct.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.488

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.166 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations33
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Ecology and EvolutionSame topicBotany, Ecology, and Taxonomy StudiesFrench-language works237,207