MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4321781533 · doi:10.1029/2022gl101985

Low‐Altitude UAV Imaging Accurately Quantifies Eelgrass Wasting Disease From Alaska to California

2023· article· en· W4321781533 on OpenAlexafffund
Bo Yang, Timothy L. Hawthorne, Lillian R. Aoki, Deanna S. Beatty, Tyler Copeland, Lia K. Domke, Ginny L. Eckert, Carla P. Gomes, Olivia Graham, C. Drew Harvell, Kevin A. Hovel, Margot Hessing‐Lewis, Leah Harper, Ryan Mueller, Brendan Rappazzo, Luba Y. Reshitnyk, John J. Stachowicz, Fiona Tomás, J. Emmett Duffy

Bibliographic record

VenueGeophysical Research Letters · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine and coastal plant biology
Canadian institutionsTula Foundation
FundersHakai InstituteTula FoundationSmithsonian InstitutionNational Science Foundation
KeywordsSeagrassAltitude (triangle)Intertidal zoneEnvironmental scienceMass wastingHabitatRemote sensingGeographyPhysical geographyEcologyGeologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Declines in eelgrass, an important and widespread coastal habitat, are associated with wasting disease in recent outbreaks on the Pacific coast of North America. This study presents a novel method for mapping and predicting wasting disease using Unoccupied Aerial Vehicle (UAV) with low‐altitude autonomous imaging of visible bands. We conducted UAV mapping and sampling in intertidal eelgrass beds across multiple sites in Alaska, British Columbia, and California. We designed and implemented a UAV low‐altitude mapping protocol to detect disease prevalence and validated against in situ results. Our analysis revealed that green leaf area index derived from UAV imagery was a strong and significant (inverse) predictor of spatial distribution and severity of wasting disease measured on the ground, especially for regions with extensive disease infection. This study highlights a novel, efficient, and portable method to investigate seagrass disease at landscape scales across geographic regions and conditions.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.053
Threshold uncertainty score0.106

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations9
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeophysical Research Letters→Same topicMarine and coastal plant biology→French-language works237,207→