Marine spatial planning for socio‐ecological management of animal‐associated microbiomes
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 Biodiversity changes and habitat shifts are two phenomena substantially reshaping marine life on our present and future planet. Although those phenomena are well recognized on the macrobial level, they currently do not receive similar attention on the microbial level. Generally, microbiome diversity and function, associated with and governing the health and fitness of their host organisms, are neglected in conservation efforts. This is especially problematic as previous research has highlighted that host‐associated microbes (microbiomes) may display distribution patterns that are not only correlated with host animal biogeographies but also with other factors such as prevailing environmental conditions. Here, marine spatial planning for socio‐ecological management of animal‐associated microbiomes is discussed, using deep‐sea sponge and coral‐associated microbiomes as an example of how to incorporate microbial diversity into conservation planning. We advocate for a holistic and integrative approach to marine spatial planning that incorporates the larger habitat, the host, the microbiome, as well as the socio‐economic and cultural perspective, throughout the whole decision‐making process. A general workflow containing the needed steps to establish microbiome‐integrated marine protected areas is presented, as well as the analytical steps and results underlying the implementation of the world's first microbiome‐considered marine conservation network on the Scotian Shelf off eastern Canada.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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