MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4304780007 · doi:10.1038/s41586-022-05318-4

A function-based typology for Earth’s ecosystems

2022· article· en· W4304780007 on OpenAlexaff
David A. Keith, José R. Ferrer‐Paris, Emily Nicholson, Melanie J. Bishop, Beth Polidoro, Eva Ramírez-Llodra, Mark G. Tozer, Jeanne Nel, Ralph Mac Nally, Edward J. Gregr, Kate E. Watermeyer, Franz Essl, Don Faber‐Langendoen, Janet Franklin, Caroline E. R. Lehmann, Andrés Etter, Dirk J. Roux, Jonathan S. Stark, Jessica A. Rowland, Neil Brummitt, U. Fernández-Arcaya, Iain M. Suthers, Susan K. Wiser, Ian Donohue, Leland J. Jackson, R. Toby Pennington, Thomas M. Iliffe, Vasilis Gerovasileiou, Paul S. Giller, Belinda J. Robson, Nathalie Pettorelli, Ángela Andrade, Arild Lindgaard, Teemu Tahvanainen, Aleks Terauds, Michael A. Chadwick, Nicholas Murray, Justin Moat, Patricio Pliscoff, Irene Zager, Richard T. Kingsford

Bibliographic record

VenueNature · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcosystem dynamics and resilience
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgarySciencetech (Canada)University of British Columbia
FundersNatural Environment Research CouncilSight Research UKMAVA Foundation
KeywordsEcosystem servicesEnvironmental resource managementConvention on Biological DiversityEcosystem managementTotal human ecosystemEcosystemBiodiversityNatural capitalContext (archaeology)SustainabilityBiosphereEcosystem healthBusinessEcologyGeographyEnvironmental scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract As the United Nations develops a post-2020 global biodiversity framework for the Convention on Biological Diversity, attention is focusing on how new goals and targets for ecosystem conservation might serve its vision of ‘living in harmony with nature’ 1,2 . Advancing dual imperatives to conserve biodiversity and sustain ecosystem services requires reliable and resilient generalizations and predictions about ecosystem responses to environmental change and management 3 . Ecosystems vary in their biota 4 , service provision 5 and relative exposure to risks 6 , yet there is no globally consistent classification of ecosystems that reflects functional responses to change and management. This hampers progress on developing conservation targets and sustainability goals. Here we present the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Global Ecosystem Typology, a conceptually robust, scalable, spatially explicit approach for generalizations and predictions about functions, biota, risks and management remedies across the entire biosphere. The outcome of a major cross-disciplinary collaboration, this novel framework places all of Earth’s ecosystems into a unifying theoretical context to guide the transformation of ecosystem policy and management from global to local scales. This new information infrastructure will support knowledge transfer for ecosystem-specific management and restoration, globally standardized ecosystem risk assessments, natural capital accounting and progress on the post-2020 global biodiversity framework.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0060.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.200 · 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
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

Citations333
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNatureSame topicEcosystem dynamics and resilienceFrench-language works237,207