MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4366456126 · doi:10.1111/csp2.12929

Conserving species' evolutionary potential and history: Opportunities under the <scp>Kunming–Montreal</scp> Global Biodiversity Framework

2023· article· en· W4366456126 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Marine Robuchon, Jessica M. da Silva, Grégoire Dubois, Rikki Gumbs, Sean Hoban, Linda Laikre, Nisha Owen, Andrea Perino

Bibliographic record

VenueConservation Science and Practice · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic diversity and population structure
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftEuropean CommissionDeutsches Zentrum für integrative Biodiversitätsforschung Halle-Jena-LeipzigNational Science Foundation
KeywordsBiodiversityConvention on Biological DiversityLeverage (statistics)Phylogenetic diversityDiversity (politics)Global biodiversityPhylogenetic treeGeographyBiologyEnvironmental resource managementEcologyPolitical scienceEconomicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Genetic diversity (GD) and phylogenetic diversity (PD) respectively represent species' evolutionary potential and history, and support most of the biodiversity benefits to humanity. Yet, these two biodiversity facets have been overlooked in previous biodiversity policies. As the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) adopted the Kunming–Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF) in December 2022, we analyze how GD and PD are considered in this new framework and discuss how their incorporation in the GBF could strengthen their conservation. Although the inclusion of certain indicators could be elevated, both GD and PD are an integral part of the recently adopted GBF. This represents a significant improvement compared to the CBD strategic plan 2011–2020 and an unprecedented opportunity to bring species' evolutionary potential and history to the core of public biodiversity policies. We urge the scientific community to leverage this opportunity to actually improve the conservation of species' evolutionary potential and history.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.698
Threshold uncertainty score0.608

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.007
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.204 · 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

Citations21
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueConservation Science and PracticeSame topicGenetic diversity and population structureFrench-language works237,207