MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Using the Fossil Record to Understand Extinction Risk and Inform Marine Conservation in a Changing World

2023· review· en· W4386553830 on OpenAlexaff
Seth Finnegan, Paul G. Harnik, Rowan Lockwood, Heike K. Lotze, Loren McClenachan, Sara S. Kahanamoku

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnual Review of Marine Science · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCoral and Marine Ecosystems Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExtinction (optical mineralogy)Fossil RecordEnvironmental resource managementExtinction eventGeographyEcologyNatural resource economicsEnvironmental scienceBiologyPaleontologyEconomicsSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Understanding the long-term effects of ongoing global environmental change on marine ecosystems requires a cross-disciplinary approach. Deep-time and recent fossil records can contribute by identifying traits and environmental conditions associated with elevated extinction risk during analogous events in the geologic past and by providing baseline data that can be used to assess historical change and set management and restoration targets and benchmarks. Here, we review the ecological and environmental information available in the marine fossil record and discuss how these archives can be used to inform current extinction risk assessments as well as marine conservation strategies and decision-making at global to local scales. As we consider future research directions in deep-time and conservationpaleobiology, we emphasize the need for coproduced research that unites researchers, conservation practitioners, and policymakers with the communities for whom the impacts of climate and global change are most imminent.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0080.007
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.267 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations24
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnual Review of Marine ScienceSame topicCoral and Marine Ecosystems StudiesFrench-language works237,207