MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408481959 · doi:10.1111/icad.12819

Scientists' warning on the need for greater inclusion of dragonflies in global conservation

2025· article· en· W4408481959 on OpenAlexaff
Michael J. Samways, Alex Córdoba‐Aguilar, Charl Deacon, Fernanda Alves‐Martins, Ian R. C. Baird, S. Henrik Barmentlo, Leandro Schlemmer Brasil, Jason T. Bried, Viola Clausnitzer, Adolfo Cordero‐Rivera, FELIPE HENRIQUE DATTO-LIBERATO, Geert De Knijf, Aleš Dolný, Ryo Futahashi, Rhainer Guillermo Nascimento Ferreira, Christopher Hassall, Leandro Juen, Rassim Khelifa, Federico Lozano, Javier Muzón, Göran Sahlén, Melissa Sánchez Herrera, John P. Simaika, Robby Stoks, Catalina M. Suárez‐Tovar, Frank Suhling, Yoshitaka Tsubaki, Marina Vilenica

Bibliographic record

VenueInsect Conservation and Diversity · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSpecies Distribution and Climate Change
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersUniversiteit StellenboschCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível SuperiorConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoEuropean Commission
KeywordsEcologyInclusion (mineral)Conservation scienceNature ConservationGeographyWarning systemEnvironmental resource managementBiologyEnvironmental planningBiodiversityEnvironmental scienceEngineeringSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Dragonflies (Odonata) are ancient and familiar insects with a deep and strong cultural association with humans. They have an aquatic larval stage and an aerial adult stage, meaning that they respond to ecological conditions in both freshwater and the adjacent land surface. Currently, 16% of dragonflies are threatened. Overall, they face several threats, especially habitat loss, landscape transformation, pollution, altered hydrology, spread of invasive alien species, as well as certain geographic‐specific threats. Overarching these threats, which can be interactive with each other, is the issue of global climate change and attendant extreme weather events. While many localised and habitat specialist species are under extreme threat, some other dragonfly species, mostly habitat generalists, benefit from certain moderate human activities, especially the creation of high‐quality artificial ponds. As well‐researched insects, dragonflies play an important role in the protection of freshwater and riparian ecosystems. Dragonfly assemblages have great value as sentinels of both deteriorating environmental conditions and ecosystem recovery following restoration. While similar findings on both threats and conservation actions are emerging across the world, certain ecosystems require targeted approaches. Above all, dragonflies must be included more widely in general biodiversity conservation activities and policies. Overall, dragonflies are important targets, tools and model organisms for conservation action, and they can act as potential surrogates for other taxa that also depend on high water and riparian zone quality. While research has paved the way to address these challenges, including the use of new technologies, we now urge that dragonflies be included more strongly in policy and management associated with both freshwater and adjacent terrestrial realms. This inclusion is especially effective as dragonflies have great appeal to a diverse community of people from odonatologists (citizen and professional) through to policymakers and managers, all of whom can employ dragonflies to contribute more to freshwater‐associated conservation. Finally, we propose an action plan focusing on five action points that address opportunities, and we suggest where dragonflies can play a greater role in freshwater/riparian zone conservation more widely across the world.

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)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.031
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.099

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.031
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0120.019
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.002

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations18
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInsect Conservation and DiversitySame topicSpecies Distribution and Climate ChangeFrench-language works237,207