Climate change impacts on the coral reefs of the UK Overseas Territory of the Pitcairn Islands: resilience and adaptation considerations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The coral reefs of the Pitcairn Islands are in one of the most remote areas of the Pacific Ocean, and yet they are exposed to the impacts of anthropogenic climate change. The Pitcairn Islands Marine Protected Area was designated in 2016 and is one of the largest in the world, but the marine environment around these highly isolated islands remains poorly documented. Evidence collated here indicates that while the Pitcairn Islands' reefs have thus far been relatively sheltered from the effect of warming sea temperatures, there is substantial risk of future coral decalcification due to ocean acidification. The projected acceleration in the rate of sea level rise, and the reefs' exposure to risks from distant ocean swells and cold-water intrusions, add further uncertainty as to whether these islands and their reefs will continue to adapt and persist into the future. Coordinated action within the context of the Pitcairn Islands Marine Protected Area can help enhance the resilience of the reefs in the Pitcairn Islands. Options include management of other human pressures, control of invasive species and active reef interventions. More research, however, is needed in order to better assess what are the most appropriate and feasible options to protect these reefs.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".