What and where? Predicting invasion hotspots in the Arctic marine realm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The risk of aquatic invasions in the Arctic is expected to increase with climate warming, greater shipping activity and resource exploitation in the region. Planktonic and benthic marine aquatic invasive species (AIS) with the greatest potential for invasion and impact in the Canadian Arctic were identified and the 23 riskiest species were modelled to predict their potential spatial distributions at pan-Arctic and global scales. Modelling was conducted under present environmental conditions and two intermediate future (2050 and 2100) global warming scenarios. Invasion hotspots-regions of the Arctic where habitat is predicted to be suitable for a high number of potential AIS-were located in Hudson Bay, Northern Grand Banks/Labrador, Chukchi/Eastern Bering seas and Barents/White seas, suggesting that these regions could be more vulnerable to invasions. Globally, both benthic and planktonic organisms showed a future poleward shift in suitable habitat. At a pan-Arctic scale, all organisms showed suitable habitat gains under future conditions. However, at the global scale, habitat loss was predicted in more tropical regions for some taxa, particularly most planktonic species. Results from the present study can help prioritize management efforts in the face of climate change in the Arctic marine ecosystem. Moreover, this particular approach provides information to identify present and future high-risk areas for AIS in response to global warming.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".