MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4291993726 · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.3001729

The EICAT+ framework enables classification of positive impacts of alien taxa on native biodiversity

2022· article· en· W4291993726 on OpenAlexaff
Giovanni Vimercati, Anna F. Probert, Lara Volery, Rubén Bernardo‐Madrid, Sandro Bertolino, Vanessa Céspedes, Franz Essl, Thomas Evans, Belinda Gallardo, Laure Gallien, Pablo González‐Moreno, Marie Charlotte Grange, Cang Hui, Jonathan M. Jeschke, Stelios Katsanevakis, Ingolf Kühn, Sabrina Kumschick, Jan Pergl, Petr Pyšek, Loren H. Rieseberg, Tamara B. Robinson, Wolf‐Christian Saul, Cascade J. B. Sorte, Montserrat Vilà, John R. Wilson, Sven Bacher

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS Biology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersAgencia Estatal de InvestigaciónAustralian Research CouncilNatural Environment Research CouncilAkademie Věd České RepublikyMinisterio de Ciencia e InnovaciónBundesministerium für Bildung und ForschungDST-NRF Centre of Excellence for Invasion BiologyAustrian Science FundTechnology Agency of the Czech RepublicAgence Nationale de la RechercheDepartment of Forestry, Fisheries and the EnvironmentNational Research FoundationGrantová Agentura České RepublikyLifeWatch – Niclas Öberg FoundationAlexander von Humboldt-StiftungSight Research UKSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungEuropean Regional Development FundHellenic Foundation for Research and InnovationBiodiversa+National Science Foundation
KeywordsAlienBiodiversityBiologyBiological dispersalEcologyIUCN Red ListIntroduced speciesAlien speciesTaxonInvasive speciesRange (aeronautics)HabitatPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Species introduced through human-related activities beyond their native range, termed alien species, have various impacts worldwide. The IUCN Environmental Impact Classification for Alien Taxa (EICAT) is a global standard to assess negative impacts of alien species on native biodiversity. Alien species can also positively affect biodiversity (for instance, through food and habitat provisioning or dispersal facilitation) but there is currently no standardized and evidence-based system to classify positive impacts. We fill this gap by proposing EICAT+, which uses 5 semiquantitative scenarios to categorize the magnitude of positive impacts, and describes underlying mechanisms. EICAT+ can be applied to all alien taxa at different spatial and organizational scales. The application of EICAT+ expands our understanding of the consequences of biological invasions and can inform conservation decisions.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.003
Bibliometrics0.0060.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.004

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations73
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS BiologySame topicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics StudiesFrench-language works237,207