MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410211902 · doi:10.3390/d17050339

Borderless Lizards: Unveiling Overlooked Records and the Expanding Invasion of Anolis sagrei in Ecuador

2025· article· en· W4410211902 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Víctor Romero, Edison Maxi, Karen Cando, Marlon Vega, Johe Sozoranga, Luis Rodrigo Saa

Bibliographic record

VenueDiversity · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAmphibian and Reptile Biology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinisterio del Ambiente, Agua y Transición Ecológica
KeywordsAnolisBiologyEcologyZoologyGeographyLizard

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We evaluated the global distribution of Anolis sagrei based on bibliographic records, GBIF, and iNaturalist data. Native to Cuba and the Bahamas, this lizard has spread across mainland America, particularly in the Caribbean, Central America, and parts of the U.S. It has also been introduced in Asia, and according to iNaturalist observations, it has been recorded in Israel, Canada, and northern South America. This species is especially abundant in the Caribbean and southeastern U.S., with high concentrations of records indicating a significant range expansion. In Ecuador, A. sagrei has been recorded along the coast and in the Amazon, with occurrences in Esmeraldas, Manabí, Guayas, Francisco de Orellana, and for the first time in Zamora Chinchipe (southern Amazon), specifically in El Pangui. The capture of 10 individuals confirmed their morphology, showing similarities with populations from Honduras and Cuba but differences in scalation and body size. In Ecuador, the fourth toe lamellae range from 29 to 33, consistent with those populations, while dorsal and ventral scales show variation (dorsal: 11–22, ventral: 10–25). Climate change favors its spread by enabling the colonization of new habitats. As an invasive species, it threatens local biodiversity, highlighting the need for monitoring and control in Amazonian Ecuador. An expanded abstract in Spanish is available, intended for local decision-makers.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.357

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.215 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiversitySame topicAmphibian and Reptile BiologyFrench-language works237,207