Ready, Set, Go: Community Science Field Campaign Reveals Habitat Preferences of Nonnative Asian Earthworms in an Urban Landscape
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Asian pheretimoid earthworms of the genera Amynthas and Metaphire (jumping worms) are leading a new wave of coinvasion into Northeastern and Midwestern states, with potential consequences for native organisms and ecosystem processes. However, little is known about their distribution, abundance, and habitat preferences in urban landscapes—areas that will likely influence their range expansion via human-driven spread. We led a participatory field campaign to assess jumping worm distribution and abundance in Madison, Wisconsin, in the United States. By compressing 250 person-hours of sampling effort into a single day, we quantified the presence and abundance of three jumping worm species across different land-cover types (forest, grassland, open space, and residential lawns and gardens), finding that urban green spaces differed in invasibility. We show that community science can be powerful for researching invasive species while engaging the public in conservation. This approach was particularly effective in the present study, where broad spatial sampling was required within a short temporal window.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 it