Proposals to amend the Appendices for possible consideration at CoP15 PROPOSAL TO RECONCILE THE CITES APPENDICES FOR PUMA CONCOLOR WITH THE STANDARD NOMENCLATURE REFERENCE FOR MAMMALS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
1. This document has been submitted by Canada*. 2. Puma concolor is widely distributed throughout North, Central and South America. The standard nomenclature reference for mammals agreed to in Resolution Conf. 12.11 (Rev CoP14), Mammals of the World, 3rd Edition (Wilson and Reeder 2005) considers the 16 formerly recognized subspecies of cougar in North America as P. concolor couguar. 3. The subspecies Puma concolor coryi, Puma concolor costaricensis, and Puma concolor couguar are included in Appendix I. All other P. concolor subspecies are included in Appendix II. 4. Puma concolor costaricensis is still considered a distinct subspecies and thus the new nomenclature has no impact on its CITES listing. However, the new nomenclature does not recognize Puma concolor couguar (Eastern cougar) and Puma concolor coryi (Florida Panther) as distinct subspecies, nor are they genetically distinct from other North American cougar subspecies (Culver et al, 2000). 5. In accordance with the standard nomenclature reference for mammals agreed to in Resolution Conf. 12.11 (Rev CoP14), synonyms of Puma concolor (Linnaeus, 1771) include: P. c. concolor (Linnaeus, 1771) (includes the previous subspecies and synonyms bangsi; incarum; osgoodi; soasoaranna; soderstromii; sucuacuara; wavula); P. c. anthonyi (includes the previous subspecies and synonyms acrocodia; borbensis; capricornensis; concolor (Pelzeln, 1883); greeni; nigra); P. c. cabrerae (includes the previous subspecies and synonyms hudsoni; puma (Marcelli,1922); P. c. costaricensis; P. c. couguar (includes the previous subspecies and synonyms arundivaga;
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.022 | 0.116 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.010 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.030 | 0.019 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.096 | 0.098 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".