MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394563726 · doi:10.1093/icesjms/fsae039

The International Union for Conservation of Nature Red List does not account for intraspecific diversity

2024· article· en· W4394563726 on OpenAlexaffabout
Kjell Magnus Norderhaug, Halvor Knutsen, Karen Filbee‐Dexter, Marte Sodeland, Per Erik Jorde, Thomas Wernberg, Rebekah A. Oomen, Even Moland

Bibliographic record

VenueICES Journal of Marine Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Conservation and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
FundersAustralian Research CouncilNærings- og FiskeridepartementetInterregNordisk Ministerråd
KeywordsIntraspecific competitionDiversity (politics)European unionGeographyNature ConservationEcologyBiologyPolitical scienceInternational tradeBusinessLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List identifies threatened and endangered species and is a key instrument in global biodiversity conservation efforts. Our understanding of the structure and value of genetic biodiversity below the species level is rapidly increasing. Nonetheless, the IUCN assessment criteria overlook genetic variation within species. Here, we address this blind spot and discuss the principles of species conservation status classification relative to intraspecific biodiversity. We focus on coastal species, which thrive in heterogeneous environments known to drive genetic differentiation. The focal example species, Atlantic cod and sugar kelp, have contrasting life histories, are ecologically and economically important constituents of the coastal ecosystem, and are currently not classified as threatened in Norway and Canada. We expose important variation in population structure, the presence of ecotypes and genetic-environment covariation, as well as loss of ecotypes that threatens the conservation of these species. Because the genetic makeup of species directly influences their resilience, omitting this information from conservation status assessments can result in loss of adaptive capacity to future stressors, such as climate change. Consequently, recognizing and preserving intraspecific variation emerges as vital for species’ abilities to adapt to and survive in future ocean conditions.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.023
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 score0.165
Threshold uncertainty score0.328

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.023
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.010
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.006

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Citations14
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueICES Journal of Marine ScienceSame topicEnvironmental Conservation and ManagementFrench-language works237,207