MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408162334 · doi:10.1002/ecy.70009

<scp>PROCEED</scp> v6.1: Phenotypic rates of change evolutionary and ecological database

2025· article· en· W4408162334 on OpenAlexafffund
Lucas D. Gorné, Andrew P. Hendry, Fanie Pelletier, Sarah Sanderson, Cristián Correa, Carlos F. Arias, Marc‐Olivier Beausoleil, Maryse Boisjoly, Erika Crispo, Daniel Berner, Luis F. De León, Joseph D. DiBattista, Grant E. Haines, Benjamin C. Haller, Michael T. Kinnison, Shahin Muttalib, Ann E. McKellar, Rose E. O’Dea, Winer Daniel Reyes‐Corral, Yanny Ritchot, Krista B. Oke, Zachary T. Wood, Thomas J. Farrugia, Kiyoko M. Gotanda

Bibliographic record

VenueEcology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityBrock UniversityUniversité de Sherbrooke
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMcGill UniversityBrock UniversityNational Science Foundation
KeywordsIntraspecific competitionBiologyEcologyEnvironmental changePopulationNoveltyExtinction (optical mineralogy)Phenotypic plasticityDatabaseEvolutionary biologyClimate changeDemographyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Populations must continuously respond to environmental change or risk extinction. These responses can be measured as phenotypic rates of change, which allow researchers to predict their contemporary evolutionary responses. In 1999, a database of phenotypic rates of change in wild populations was compiled. Since then, researchers have used (and expanded) this database to examine the phenotypic responses as a function of the features of the study system (i.e., the population or set of populations, of a given species, that experienced a specific driver or disturbance), the measured traits, and methodological approaches. Therefore, PROCEED (Phenotypic Rates of Change Evolutionary and Ecological Database) is an ongoing compilation of rates of phenotypic change, typically calculated as Haldanes and Darwins, published in peer-reviewed literature (but also including data from theses and technical reports). Studies in this database measure the intraspecific change in quantitative (continuous or discrete) traits and report either the time elapsed from the onset of environmental novelty, or reference a historical or biological event reported in other sources (e.g., a mine opening or a well-documented biological invasion). Included studies either follow a single population through time (allochronic design) or compare two or more populations that diverged at a known time (synchronic design). Some included studies account for the total phenotypic variability in the field (i.e., phenotypic studies), while others employed common-garden or other quantitative genetic approaches to account for the heritable component of the phenotypic change (i.e., genetic studies). PROCEED includes systems in both natural and experimental conditions, provided that reproduction was not manipulated (i.e., artificial selection experiments were excluded). In the included experimental systems, the environment of the focal populations was manipulated (e.g., an herbivory exclusion experiment, where the type and load of herbivory are manipulated) but the studies did not deliberately select for trait values in the study population (e.g., the plant height). PROCEED does not include systems where the phenotypic change is presumably due to interspecific hybridization, polyploidy, or other chromosomal alterations. Here, we present the most recently updated PROCEED (Version 6.1). This new, curated version has 9263 records (n) collated from 326 studies, 1801 systems, and 428 species. The database includes records belonging to mammals (n = 686), birds (n = 1475), reptiles (n = 96), amphibians (n = 23), fishes (n = 3671), invertebrates (n = 1141, mostly arthropods), and plants (n = 2171). The maximum elapsed time between the environmental change and the sampling is 500 years but is typically less than 100 years (third quartile 89.5; median 45 years). The database also includes a set of variables describing biological and methodological aspects of the study system and measured traits, along with features of the sampling design in the primary source of information. This new version of PROCEED also includes a time series dataset comprising a subset of records included in the general dataset. These are allochronic studies with three or more sampling times throughout the entire study period. The time series dataset contains 655 time series (s)-belonging to 61 studies, from 156 systems, and 77 species-including mammals (s = 140), birds (s = 77), reptiles (s = 4), amphibians (s = 8), fishes (s = 404), and plants (s = 22). The data are released under a Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedication license.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.044
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.397
Threshold uncertainty score0.861

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.044
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0110.018
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0060.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.3970.206

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.242 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcologySame topicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics StudiesFrench-language works237,207