Marine biodiversity of a pristine coral reef in French Polynesia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Understanding the natural state of coral reefs is paramount to evaluate the response of these ecosystems to local and global human impacts as well as management and conservation strategies. In French Polynesia, some islands are still pristine or uninhabited, such as Tupai atoll. Tupai has been uninhabited, with access to the lagoon prohibited since 2010. However, fishers from nearby islands often take from the outer reef slope at Tupai. Our marine biodiversity survey (coral, macro-invertebrates, and fish) conducted in 2019 highlighted a low density of commercial fish species and top-predators on the outer slope in comparison to the lagoon, where the top-predators represented 16% (of the density) of functional trophic groups. Our surveys also showed a high living coral cover (46%) on the outer slope of Tupai, perhaps due to the absence of both touristic sub-aquatic activities and local pollution from private and commercial activities. Overall, this initial scientific assessment of Tupai has granted an understanding of the spatial patterns of coral, macro-invertebrates, and fish assemblages in the absence of human impacts (i.e., in the lagoon), representing an ecological baseline that could inform conservation management strategies to ensure the preservation of coral reef ecosystem.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".