MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3092330127 · doi:10.11606/1807-0205/2020.60.40

Reptile diversity in the Duas Bocas Biological Reserve, Espírito Santo, southeastern Brazil

2020· article· en· W3092330127 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Jonathan Silva Cozer, Juliane Pereira‐Ribeiro, Thais Meirelles Linause, Átilla Colombo Ferreguetti, Helena Godoy Bergallo, Carlos Frederico Duarte Rocha

Bibliographic record

VenuePapéis Avulsos de Zoologia · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAmphibian and Reptile Biology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstituto Chico Mendes de Conservação da BiodiversidadeMinistério da Ciência, Tecnologia, Inovações e ComunicaçõesConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoFundação Carlos Chagas Filho de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio de JaneiroCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível SuperiorCanadian Foundation for Dietetic ResearchRufford Foundation
KeywordsSpecies richnessBiomeEcologyGeographyBiodiversityAbundance (ecology)EndemismSpecies diversityForestryBiologyEcosystem

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The lack of information on the occurrence of species in a region limits the understanding of the composition and structure of the local community and, consequently, restricts the proposition of effective measures for species conservation. In this study, we researched the reptiles in the Duas Bocas Biological Reserve (DBBR), Espírito Santo, southeastern Brazil. We analyzed the parameters of the local community, such as richness, composition, and abundance of species. We conducted samplings from August 2017 to January 2019, through active search. We performed the samplings in nine standard plots of 250 meters in length. All individuals located in the plots or occasionally on the trails were registered. To evaluate sample effort to characterize the reptile community, we performed an accumulation curve of species, and to update the DBBR reptile list, we used as secondary data specimens deposited in collections and previously published studies. Considering primary and secondary data, we recorded 38 species, one chelonia, 13 lizards, and 24 snakes. Our study showed a richness of 15 additional species to the previous list of reptiles, increasing by about 40% the known richness to the area. We concluded that the DBBR holds a high richness of reptile species, representing 12% of the richness of reptiles of the Atlantic Forest and with a considerable number of endemic species in this biome. This suggests that the DBBR is an important forest fragment constituting a reservoir of the biodiversity of the reptiles of the Atlantic Forest.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.087
Threshold uncertainty score0.173

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.204 · 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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePapéis Avulsos de ZoologiaSame topicAmphibian and Reptile BiologyFrench-language works237,207