Hierarchical modelling of epibenthic communities on the Scotian Shelf and Gulf of Maine (Atlantic Canada) in support of conservation planning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Identification of ecologically significant units at different spatial scales is essential for management of biodiversity attributes. This case study illustrates a coupled methodological approach to delineate benthic habitats and associated assemblages at different spatial scales. Two complementary analyses were employed based on the occurrences of 99 epibenthic invertebrate species in Atlantic Canada, sampled during depth-stratified random trawl sets. To identify epibenthic assemblage types, isometric feature mapping and partitioning around medoids (ISOPAM) was used in combination with a joint species distribution model (JSDM), which also produced continuous distribution surfaces across the spatial domain. ISOPAM identified nine significantly spatially coherent assemblages (biotopes) at spatial scales of hundreds of meters to hundreds of kilometers, with associated diagnostic species. Those assemblages were closely matched by eight regions of common profile using the JSDM, indicating strong environmental influences on their distributions. These smaller-scale assemblages were grouped into three biophysical units. The results from the JSDM were validated with independent data showing good congruence. This indicates that the spatial units ascribed to identified assemblages are robust and suitable for marine spatial planning and monitoring.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".