MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3107865087 · doi:10.3389/fmars.2020.572680

A Marine Biodiversity Observation Network for Genetic Monitoring of Hard-Bottom Communities (ARMS-MBON)

2020· article· en· W3107865087 on OpenAlexaff
Matthias Obst, Katrina Exter, A. Louise Allcock, Christos Arvanitidis, Alizz Axberg, María Bustamante, Ibon Cancio, Diego Carreira-Flores, Eva Chatzinikolaou, Giorgos Chatzigeorgiou, Nathan Chrismas, Melody S. Clark, Thierry Comtet, Thanos Dailianis, Neil Davies, Klaas Deneudt, Oihane Díaz de Cerio, Ana Fortič, Vasilis Gerovasileiou, Pascal I. Hablützel, Kleoniki Keklikoglou, Georgios Kotoulas, Rafał Lasota, Barbara R. Leite, Stéphane Loisel, Laurent Lévêque, Liraz Levy, Magdalena Małachowicz, Borut Mavrič, Chris Meyer, Jonas Mortelmans, Joanna Norkko, Nicolas Pade, Anne Power, Andreja Ramšak, Henning Reiss, Jostein Solbakken, Peter A. Stæhr, Per Sundberg, Jakob Thyrring, Jesús S. Troncoso, Frédérique Viard, Roman Wenne, Eleni Ioanna Yperifanou, Małgorzata Zbawicka, Christina Pavloudi

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Marine Science · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental DNA in Biodiversity Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersInterregNatural Environment Research CouncilUniversidade de Santiago de CompostelaUniversidade do MinhoVetenskapsrådetSmithsonian InstitutionSight Research UKChina Building Materials AcademyH2020 Research InfrastructuresLifeWatch – Niclas Öberg FoundationHavs- och Vattenmyndigheten
KeywordsBiodiversityTop-down and bottom-up designOceanographyEnvironmental scienceGeographyFisheryEnvironmental resource managementBiologyEcologyComputer scienceGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Marine hard-bottom communities are undergoing severe change under the influence of multiple drivers, notably climate change, extraction of natural resources, pollution and eutrophication, habitat degradation, and invasive species. Monitoring marine biodiversity in such habitats is, however, challenging as it typically involves expensive, non-standardized, and often destructive sampling methods that limit its scalability. Differences in monitoring approaches furthermore hinders inter-comparison among monitoring programs. Here, we announce a Marine Biodiversity Observation Network (MBON) consisting of Autonomous Reef Monitoring Structures (ARMS) with the aim to assess the status and changes in benthic fauna with genomic-based methods, notably DNA metabarcoding, in combination with image-based identifications. This article presents the results of a 30-month pilot phase in which we established an operational and geographically expansive ARMS-MBON. The network currently consists of 20 observatories distributed across European coastal waters and the polar regions, in which 134 ARMS have been deployed to date. Sampling takes place annually, either as short-term deployments during the summer or as long-term deployments starting in spring. The pilot phase was used to establish a common set of standards for field sampling, genetic analysis, data management, and legal compliance, which are presented here. We also tested the potential of ARMS for combining genetic and image-based identification methods in comparative studies of benthic diversity, as well as for detecting non-indigenous species. Results show that ARMS are suitable for monitoring hard-bottom environments as they provide genetic data that can be continuously enriched, re-analyzed, and integrated with conventional data to document benthic community composition and detect non-indigenous species. Finally, we provide guidelines to expand the network and present a sustainability plan as part of the European Marine Biological Resource Centre ( www.embrc.eu ).

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Methods
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationallow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationallow
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.180 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreMethods · Empirical

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

Citations59
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Marine ScienceSame topicEnvironmental DNA in Biodiversity StudiesFrench-language works237,207