MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3037105506 · doi:10.1111/brv.12627

Scientists' warning on invasive alien species

2020· article· en· W3037105506 on OpenAlexaff
Petr Pyšek, Philip E. Hulme, Daniel Simberloff, Sven Bacher, Tim M. Blackburn, James T. Carlton, Wayne Dawson, Franz Essl, Llewellyn C. Foxcroft, Piero Genovesi, Jonathan M. Jeschke, Ingolf Kühn, Andrew M. Liebhold, Nicholas E. Mandrak, Laura A. Meyerson, Aníbal Pauchard, Jan Pergl, Helen E. Roy, Hanno Seebens, Mark van Kleunen, Montserrat Vilà, Michael J. Wingfield, David M. Richardson

Bibliographic record

VenueBiological reviews/Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSpecies Distribution and Climate Change
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersUniversiteit StellenboschNatural Environment Research CouncilAkademie Věd České RepublikyComisión Nacional de Investigación Científica y TecnológicaMinistry of Business, Innovation and EmploymentAustrian Science FundBundesministerium für Bildung und ForschungMinisterio de Ciencia, Innovación y UniversidadesGrantová Agentura České RepublikySight Research UKDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftNational Research FoundationBelmont ForumSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungBiodiversa+U.S. Forest ServiceAgence Nationale de la RechercheU.S. Department of AgricultureFondo de Fomento al Desarrollo Científico y TecnológicoErnest Oppenheimer Memorial TrustNational Science Foundation
KeywordsAlienAlien speciesInvasive speciesGeographyEcologyBiologyMedicineEnvironmental health

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Biological invasions are a global consequence of an increasingly connected world and the rise in human population size. The numbers of invasive alien species - the subset of alien species that spread widely in areas where they are not native, affecting the environment or human livelihoods - are increasing. Synergies with other global changes are exacerbating current invasions and facilitating new ones, thereby escalating the extent and impacts of invaders. Invasions have complex and often immense long-term direct and indirect impacts. In many cases, such impacts become apparent or problematic only when invaders are well established and have large ranges. Invasive alien species break down biogeographic realms, affect native species richness and abundance, increase the risk of native species extinction, affect the genetic composition of native populations, change native animal behaviour, alter phylogenetic diversity across communities, and modify trophic networks. Many invasive alien species also change ecosystem functioning and the delivery of ecosystem services by altering nutrient and contaminant cycling, hydrology, habitat structure, and disturbance regimes. These biodiversity and ecosystem impacts are accelerating and will increase further in the future. Scientific evidence has identified policy strategies to reduce future invasions, but these strategies are often insufficiently implemented. For some nations, notably Australia and New Zealand, biosecurity has become a national priority. There have been long-term successes, such as eradication of rats and cats on increasingly large islands and biological control of weeds across continental areas. However, in many countries, invasions receive little attention. Improved international cooperation is crucial to reduce the impacts of invasive alien species on biodiversity, ecosystem services, and human livelihoods. Countries can strengthen their biosecurity regulations to implement and enforce more effective management strategies that should also address other global changes that interact with invasions.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0310.034
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.006

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 head0.216
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.084 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations2,131
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiological reviews/Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical SocietySame topicSpecies Distribution and Climate ChangeFrench-language works237,207