Macro-moth (Lepidoptera) Diversity of a Newly Shaped Ecological Corridor and the Surrounding Forest Area in the Western Italian Alps
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
In addition to the compilation of biodiversity inventories, checklists, especially if combined with abundance data, are important tools to understand species distribution, habitat use, and community composition over time. Their importance is even higher when ecological indicator taxa are considered, as in the case of moths. In this work, we investigated macro-moth diversity in a forest area (30 ha) in the Western Italian Alps, recently subjected to intense management activities. Indeed, an ecological corridor, which includes 10 clearings, has been shaped thanks to forest compensation related to the construction site of the Turin–Lyon High-Speed Railway. Here, we identified 17 patches (9 clearings and 8 forests), and we conducted moth surveys using UV–LED light traps. A total of 15,614 individuals belonging to 442 species were collected in 2020 and 2021. Two and fifteen species are new records for Piedmont and for Susa Valley, respectively. In addition to the faunistic interest of the data, this study—using a standardized method—provides geo-referenced occurrences, species-richness, and abundance values useful to compile a baseline dataset for future comparisons. Indeed, the replicable and easy shareable method allows us to make comparisons with other research and thus assess the impact of environmental changes.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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