Conserving species' evolutionary potential and history: Opportunities under the <scp>Kunming–Montreal</scp> Global Biodiversity Framework
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
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.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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