MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4295430125 · doi:10.1016/j.japb.2022.08.002

Thailand's online reptile market decreases but shifts toward native species during COVID-19

2022· article· en· W4295430125 on OpenAlexaff
Jordi Janssen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Asia-Pacific Biodiversity · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicRabies epidemiology and control
Canadian institutionsWildlife Conservation Society Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWildlife tradePoachingWildlifeCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PandemicGeographyWildlife conservationBusinessDevelopment economicsFisheryInternational tradeEcologyBiologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The recent COVID-19 pandemic presented the world with a crisis of incredible scale and made wildlife markets the focal point of authorities. Scientific literature on COVID-19 and wildlife trade overwhelmingly focused on the zoonotic risks of wildlife markets. As many physical marketplaces for wildlife were faced with closure or restrictions to curb the spread of COVID-19, alternative sale platforms were sought. I monitored social media platforms in Thailand during the pandemic and compared this with data obtained in 2016. I found a significant reduction of lizards and snakes offered for sale on social media, compared with before the pandemic. Although the quantity decreased, I found that the number of species almost doubled in snakes, of which unprotected native species increased by 245%. Transport restrictions would limit the mobility of harvesters and interrupts trade chains, and thus could explain the reduced number of snakes and lizards for sale. However, the increase in native species for sale shows that the impact of this international trade disruption could shift focus from international trade to what is locally available. Potentially having serious consequences for the conservation of local species and in line with previous studies documenting increased poaching rates and wildlife crime incidents.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.137
Threshold uncertainty score0.990

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.213 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Asia-Pacific BiodiversitySame topicRabies epidemiology and controlFrench-language works237,207