Data from: Non-native species spread in a complex network: the interaction of global transport and local population dynamics determines invasion success
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The number of released individuals, which is a component of propagule pressure, is considered to be a major driver for the establishment success of non-native species. However, propagule pressure is often assumed to result from single or few release events, which does not necessarily apply to the frequent releases of invertebrates or other taxa through global transport. For instance, the high intensity of global shipping may result in frequent releases of large numbers of individuals, and the complexity of shipping dynamics impedes predictions of invasion dynamics. Here, we present a mathematical model for the spread of planktonic organisms by global shipping, using the history of movements by 33,566 ships among 1,477 ports to simulate population dynamics for the comb jelly Mnemiopsis leidyi as a case study. The degree of propagule pressure at one site resulted from the coincident arrival of individuals from other sites with native or non-native populations. Key to sequential spread in European waters was a readily available source of propagules and a suitable recipient environment. These propagules were derived from previously introduced ‘bridgehead’ populations supplemented with those from native sources. Invasion success is therefore determined by the complex interaction of global shipping and local population dynamics. The general findings likely hold true for the spread of species in other complex systems, such as insects or plant seeds exchanged via commercial trade or transport.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".