Els límits planetaris, les entitats noves i la biodiversitat. Una revisió sistemàtica del cas del glifosat
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This analysis focuses on the convergence of two planetary boundaries that have already been clearly exceeded: Biosphere Integrity and Novel 3. Glyphosate was selected as a paradigmatic case for this study, given its widespread global use as an herbicide. Employing the SALSA methodology, a systematic review of 191 scientific publications was conducted, revealing notable growth in publications related to this topic, especially since 2015, which coincides with the update of the planetary boundaries framework. The findings indicate a strong concentration of studies in Northern Hemisphere countries, such as Canada and the USA, while tropical ecosystems are scarcely represented. From a thematic perspective, 45% of the studies focus on biodiversity effects, yet only a small percentage (just 3.7%) directly link glyphosate with the planetary boundaries framework. Additionally, there is a methodological bias towards field studies, with a taxonomic emphasis mainly on flora and arthropods. The conceptual analysis of the study identified four main pathways of environmental impact caused by glyphosate: effects on pollinators, toxicity in aquatic environments, alteration of soil microbiota, and damage to non-target vegetation. These impacts, often potentiated by synergistic effects, generate negative feedbacks that endanger biosphere integrity, reinforcing the conclusion that glyphosate acts as a novel entity capable of severely destabilizing global ecological balance by impacting and reducing biodiversity
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 | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.003 |
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".