MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4381053078 · doi:10.5962/p.357841

Fishes of Australia’s Great Artesian Basin Springs – An Overview

2020· article· en· W4381053078 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Adam Kerezsy

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Royal Society of Queensland · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFisheryGeographyArtesian aquiferStructural basinGeologyBiologyGroundwaterGeomorphologyAquifer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Patterns of fish distribution within Great Artesian Basin springs fall into two distinct categories: the opportunistic colonisation of springs by widespread riverine species following flooding, and long-term habitation -and speciation -within isolated spring complexes by fishes endemic to certain spring complexes.The endemic fishes of Australia's Great Artesian Basin springs persist in what some would consider the most unlikely fish habitats imaginable.Within predominantly hot and dry landscapes, they inhabit the only reliable wet areas, which are frequently the same temperature as the surrounding plains and as shallow as the body depth of some of the species.There are seven narrow-range fish species endemic to Great Artesian Basin springs: the Dalhousie catfish (Neosiluris gloveri), Dalhousie hardyhead (Craterocephalus dalhousiensis), red-finned blue-eye (Scaturiginichthys vermeilipinnis), three localised species of gobies (Chlamydogobius gloveri, C. micropterus and C. squamigenus) and the Dalhousie mogurnda (Mogurnda thermophila).These species occur at only three locations: Dalhousie in South Australia; and the Pelican Creek and Elizabeth Springs complexes, which are both in Queensland.An eighth species, the desert goby (Chlamydogobius eremius) has a wider range across multiple spring complexes in South Australia.All GAB endemic spring species should be considered endangered due to their small ranges and small populations; however, their formal status varies widely between state, national and international legislation and/or lists.Additionally, all fish endemic to GAB springs are threatened by a broad suite of factors that endanger inland aquatic ecosystems, such as water extraction, pollution, and the possibility that alien or unwanted species may become established.Persisting as they do in such unique and specialised habitats, the study of these GAB fish -and all GAB springs endemics -can reveal much about evolution, speciation and resilience.Although there is a growing recognition that conservation of the fishes and their habitats is important, this is complicated by the confusing variability of their conservation status and a lack of basic knowledge regarding their ecology and precise distribution.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.083
Threshold uncertainty score0.165

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.209 · 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

Citations7
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Royal Society of QueenslandSame topicFish Ecology and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207