Data from: Biogeographic regions of North American mammals based on endemism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since the 19th century, two regions have been recognized for North American mammals, which overlap in Mexico. The Nearctic region corresponds to the northern areas and the Neotropical region to the southern ones. There are no recent regionalizations for these regions under the criterion of endemism. We integrate herein two methods to regionalize North America, using species distribution models of mammals: Endemicity Analysis (EA) and Parsimony Analysis of Endemicity (PAE). EA was used to obtain areas of endemism and PAE to hierarchize them. We found 76 consensus areas from 329 sets, classified in 146 cladograms, and the strict consensus cladogram shows a basal polytomy with 14 areas and 16 clades. The final regionalization recognizes two regions (Nearctic and Neotropical) and a transition zone (Mexican Transition Zone), six subregions (Canadian, Alleghanian, Californian-Rocky Mountain, Pacific Central America, Mexican Gulf-Central America and Central America), two dominions (Californian and Rocky Mountain) and 23 provinces. Our analysis show that North America is probably more complex than previously assumed.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".