MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4383954939 · doi:10.1002/ecs2.4616

<scp>BioLake</scp>: A first assessment of lake temperature‐derived bioclimatic predictors for aquatic invasive species

2023· article· en· W4383954939 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ryan C. Burner, Wesley M. Daniel, Peder Engelstad, Christopher J. Churchill, Richard A. Erickson

Bibliographic record

VenueEcosphere · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSpecies Distribution and Climate Change
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Geological Survey
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceSpecies distributionContext (archaeology)Representative Concentration PathwaysRange (aeronautics)Matching (statistics)Climate changeInvasive speciesAquatic ecosystemEcologyNull modelClimate modelEcosystemGeographyHabitatBiologyStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Aquatic invasive species (AIS) present major ecological and economic challenges globally, endangering ecosystems and human livelihoods. Managers and policy makers thus need tools to predict invasion risk and prioritize species and areas of concern, and they often use native range climate matching to determine whether a species could persist in a new location. However, climate matching for AIS often relies on air temperature rather than water temperature due to a lack of global water temperature data layers, and predictive power of models is seldom evaluated. We developed 12 global lake (water) temperature‐derived “BioLake” bioclimatic layers for distribution modeling of aquatic species and compared “climatch” climate matching predictions (from climatchR package) from BioLake with those based on BioClim temperature layers and with a null model. We did this for 73 established AIS in the United States, training the models on their ranges outside of the United States and Canada. Models using either set of climate layers outperformed the null expectation by a similar (but modest) amount on average, but some species were occasionally found in locations with low climatch scores. Mean US climatch scores were higher for most species when using air temperature. Including additional climate layers in models reduced mean climatch scores, indicating that commonly used climatch score thresholds are not absolute but can be context specific and may require calibration based upon climate data used. Although finer resolution global lake temperature data would likely improve predictions, our BioLake layers provide a starting point for aquatic species distribution modeling. Climate matching was most effective for some species that originated at low latitudes or had small ranges. Climatch scores remain useful but limited for predicting AIS risk, perhaps because current ranges seldom fully reflect climatic tolerances (fundamental niches). Managers could consider climate matching as one of a suite of tools that can be used in AIS prioritization.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.126
Threshold uncertainty score0.251

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcosphereSame topicSpecies Distribution and Climate ChangeFrench-language works237,207