MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3130900099 · doi:10.1007/s10750-021-04523-y

The unreliable concept of native range as applied to the distribution of the rusty crayfish (Faxonius rusticus) in North America

2021· article· en· W3130900099 on OpenAlexaffabout
Radu Cornel Guiașu, Mark Labib

Bibliographic record

VenueHydrobiologia · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCrustacean biology and ecology
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCrayfishIntroduced speciesInvasive speciesRange (aeronautics)EcologyConfusionBiologyNative americanGenealogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The concept of native range in invasion biology is difficult to define since, in many cases, this type of range is unknown and cannot be determined. We investigate the uncertainties related to this concept by focusing on the distribution of Faxonius rusticus (Girard, 1852), also known as the rusty crayfish, which is perceived as possibly the worst invasive crayfish species in North America. In this study, we undertake a comprehensive literature review, which includes 430 studies published between 1852 and 2018, in order to analyze the native and introduced ranges of this species. The rusty crayfish was reported to occur in 33 states in the U.S.A. and 3 Canadian Provinces. Ten of these U.S. states and one Canadian Province have been included multiple times in both the native and the non-native ranges of this crayfish. The confusion regarding the limits and history of the native range of the rusty crayfish has implications for the conservation of this species in various jurisdictions. This review also demonstrates that even for intensely studied species perceived as invasive, we often do not have a clear understanding of essential concepts such as native and non-native range.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.108
Threshold uncertainty score0.544

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations13
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHydrobiologiaSame topicCrustacean biology and ecologyFrench-language works237,207