Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 27

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Role of Small Lowland Patches of Exotic Forests as Refuges of Rare Endemic Azorean Arthropods

Tsafack, Noelline, Fattorini, Simone, Boieiro, Mário, Rigal, François, Ros-Prieto, Alejandra, Ferreira, Maria Teresa, Borges, Paulo A. V.·2021·Diversity
DOI 10.3390/d13090443
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Islands have been disproportionately affected by the current biodiversity crisis. In island biotas, one of the most recurrent anthropic alterations is species introduction. Invasion of exotic species may represent a major threat for island biotas, because invasive species may change species composition and simplify community dynamics. We investigated diversity patterns of native and introduced species in native and exotic forests of Terceira Island (Azores, Portugal) by using diversity profiles based on Hill numbers. Use of diversity profiles allows for a complete characterization of the community diversity because they combine information on species richness, rarity, and dominance. We found that native forest remnants are crucial for the maintenance of endemic Azorean arthropod diversity. However, we also found that some lowland patches of exotic forests can sustain populations of rare endemic species. Our findings reinforce the importance of the few and small remnants of native forests, which are a pillar to the conservation of Azorean endemic arthropods. However, areas occupied by exotic forests, whether they are large and contiguous or small and isolated, close to native forests, or embedded in a matrix of agriculture activities, can also play a role in the conservation of native species, including endemics.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/d13090443

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Image 1
CC-BY · From the PDF
Image 2
CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 3 Alpha diversity in native non-endemic species communities for the four taxonomic groups (Araneae, Coleoptera, Hemiptera, and Psocoptera, respectively, first to fourth column) calculated for each sampling sites selected in native and exotic forests of Terceira. Alpha diversity was expressed using Hill numbers corresponding to Chao's species richness (Species Richness), exponential Shannon diversity (Shannon Diversity), and Simpson diversity (Simpson Diversity) with interpolation-extrapolation method. Differences were assessed using a Kruskal Wallis test and asterisks represent significant differences with (*) p < 0.05 and (**) p < 0.001. Figure 3. Alpha diversity in native non-endemic species communities for the four taxonomic groups (Araneae, Coleoptera, Hemiptera, and Psocoptera, respectively, first to fourth column) calculated for each sampling sites selected in native and exotic forests of Terceira. Alpha diversity was expressed using Hill numbers corresponding to Chao's species richness (Species Richness), exponential Shannon diversity (Shannon Diversity), and Simpson diversity (Simpson Diversity) with interpolation-extrapolation method. Differences were assessed using a Kruskal Wallis test and asterisks represent significant differences with (*) p < 0.05 and (**) p < 0.001.
Figure 3 Alpha diversity in native non-endemic species communities for the four taxonomic groups (Araneae, Coleoptera, Hemiptera, and Psocoptera, respectively, first to fourth column) calculated for each sampling sites selected in native and exotic forests of Terceira. Alpha diversity was expressed using Hill numbers corresponding to Chao's species richness (Species Richness), exponential Shannon diversity (Shannon Diversity), and Simpson diversity (Simpson Diversity) with interpolation-extrapolation method. Differences were assessed using a Kruskal Wallis test and asterisks represent significant differences with (*) p < 0.05 and (**) p < 0.001. Figure 3. Alpha diversity in native non-endemic species communities for the four taxonomic groups (Araneae, Coleoptera, Hemiptera, and Psocoptera, respectively, first to fourth column) calculated for each sampling sites selected in native and exotic forests of Terceira. Alpha diversity was expressed using Hill numbers corresponding to Chao's species richness (Species Richness), exponential Shannon diversity (Shannon Diversity), and Simpson diversity (Simpson Diversity) with interpolation-extrapolation method. Differences were assessed using a Kruskal Wallis test and asterisks represent significant differences with (*) p < 0.05 and (**) p < 0.001.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 4 Alpha diversity of four introduced species communities for the four taxonomic groups (Araneae, Coleoptera, Hemiptera, and Psocoptera, respectively, first to fourth column) calculated for each sampling sites selected in native and exotic forests of Terceira. Alpha diversity was expressed using Hill numbers corresponding to Chao's species richness (Species Richness), exponential Shannon diversity (Shannon Diversity), and Simpson diversity (Simpson Diversity) with interpolation-extrapolation method Differences were assessed using a Kruskal Wallis test and asterisks represent significant differences with (*) p < 0.05 and (**) p < 0.001. Figure 4. Alpha diversity of four introduced species communities for the four taxonomic groups (Araneae, Coleoptera, Hemiptera, and Psocoptera, respectively, first to fourth column) calculated for each sampling sites selected in native and exotic forests of Terceira. Alpha diversity was expressed using Hill numbers corresponding to Chao's species richness (Species Richness), exponential Shannon diversity (Shannon Diversity), and Simpson diversity (Simpson Diversity) with interpolation-extrapolation method Differences were assessed using a Kruskal Wallis test and asterisks represent significant differences with (*) p < 0.05 and (**) p < 0.001.
Figure 4 Alpha diversity of four introduced species communities for the four taxonomic groups (Araneae, Coleoptera, Hemiptera, and Psocoptera, respectively, first to fourth column) calculated for each sampling sites selected in native and exotic forests of Terceira. Alpha diversity was expressed using Hill numbers corresponding to Chao's species richness (Species Richness), exponential Shannon diversity (Shannon Diversity), and Simpson diversity (Simpson Diversity) with interpolation-extrapolation method Differences were assessed using a Kruskal Wallis test and asterisks represent significant differences with (*) p < 0.05 and (**) p < 0.001. Figure 4. Alpha diversity of four introduced species communities for the four taxonomic groups (Araneae, Coleoptera, Hemiptera, and Psocoptera, respectively, first to fourth column) calculated for each sampling sites selected in native and exotic forests of Terceira. Alpha diversity was expressed using Hill numbers corresponding to Chao's species richness (Species Richness), exponential Shannon diversity (Shannon Diversity), and Simpson diversity (Simpson Diversity) with interpolation-extrapolation method Differences were assessed using a Kruskal Wallis test and asterisks represent significant differences with (*) p < 0.05 and (**) p < 0.001.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 5 β-diversity values of four arthropods communities (Araneae, Coleoptera, Hemiptera, and Psocoptera, respectively, first to fourth column) calculated between native and exotic forests ( A ), between sites in native forests ( B ), and between sites in exotic forests ( C ). Beta diversity was calculated separately for endemic (END), native non-endemic (NAT), Figure 5. β -diversity values of four arthropods communities (Araneae, Coleoptera, Hemiptera, and Psocoptera, respectively, first to fourth column) calculated between native and exotic forests ( A ), between sites in native forests ( B ), and between sites in exotic forests ( C ). Beta diversity was calculated separately for endemic (END), native non-endemic (NAT), and non-native introduced (INT) species. The total height represents the overall β -diversity. Overall β -diversity is partitioned into replacement (repl. in grey) and species richness (rich in green) components.
Figure 5 β-diversity values of four arthropods communities (Araneae, Coleoptera, Hemiptera, and Psocoptera, respectively, first to fourth column) calculated between native and exotic forests ( A ), between sites in native forests ( B ), and between sites in exotic forests ( C ). Beta diversity was calculated separately for endemic (END), native non-endemic (NAT), Figure 5. β -diversity values of four arthropods communities (Araneae, Coleoptera, Hemiptera, and Psocoptera, respectively, first to fourth column) calculated between native and exotic forests ( A ), between sites in native forests ( B ), and between sites in exotic forests ( C ). Beta diversity was calculated separately for endemic (END), native non-endemic (NAT), and non-native introduced (INT) species. The total height represents the overall β -diversity. Overall β -diversity is partitioned into replacement (repl. in grey) and species richness (rich in green) components.CC-BY · From the PDF
Figure 6 Local contribution to β-diversity (LCBD). Relative contribution of native forest sites ( A ) and exotic forest sites ( B ) for the four taxonomic orders (Araneae, Coleoptera, Hemiptera, and Psocoptera, respectively, first to fourth column). LCBD calculated separately for endemic (END), native non-endemic (NAT), and non-native introduced (INT) species. Figure 6. Local contribution to β -diversity (LCBD). Relative contribution of native forest sites ( A ) and exotic forest sites ( B ) for the four taxonomic orders (Araneae, Coleoptera, Hemiptera, and Psocoptera, respectively, first to fourth column). LCBD calculated separately for endemic (END), native non-endemic (NAT), and non-native introduced (INT) species.
Figure 6 Local contribution to β-diversity (LCBD). Relative contribution of native forest sites ( A ) and exotic forest sites ( B ) for the four taxonomic orders (Araneae, Coleoptera, Hemiptera, and Psocoptera, respectively, first to fourth column). LCBD calculated separately for endemic (END), native non-endemic (NAT), and non-native introduced (INT) species. Figure 6. Local contribution to β -diversity (LCBD). Relative contribution of native forest sites ( A ) and exotic forest sites ( B ) for the four taxonomic orders (Araneae, Coleoptera, Hemiptera, and Psocoptera, respectively, first to fourth column). LCBD calculated separately for endemic (END), native non-endemic (NAT), and non-native introduced (INT) species.CC-BY · From the PDF

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 63

  1. Cardoso, 2020, Scientists’ warning to humanity on insect extinctions, Biol. Conserv., 242, 108426, 10.1016/j.biocon.2020.108426 · DOI
  2. Harvey, 2020, International scientists formulate a roadmap for insect conservation and recovery, Nat. Ecol. Evol., 4, 174, 10.1038/s41559-019-1079-8 · DOI
  3. Samways, 2020, Solutions for humanity on how to conserve insects, Biol. Conserv., 242, 108427, 10.1016/j.biocon.2020.108427 · DOI
  4. Wyckhuys, 2019, Worldwide decline of the entomofauna: A review of its drivers, Biol. Conserv., 232, 8, 10.1016/j.biocon.2019.01.020 · DOI · Paper page
  5. Habel, 2019, Long-term large-scale decline in relative abundances of butterfly and burnet moth species across south-western Germany, Sci. Rep., 9, 14921, 10.1038/s41598-019-51424-1 · DOI
  6. Homburg, 2019, Where have all the beetles gone? Long-term study reveals carabid species decline in a nature reserve in Northern Germany, Insect Conserv. Divers., 12, 268, 10.1111/icad.12348 · DOI
  7. Seibold, 2019, Arthropod decline in grasslands and forests is associated with landscape-level drivers, Nature, 574, 671, 10.1038/s41586-019-1684-3 · DOI
  8. Terzopoulou, 2015, Drivers of extinction: The case of Azorean beetles, Biol. Lett., 11, 20150273, 10.1098/rsbl.2015.0273 · DOI
  9. Triantis, 2010, Extinction debt on oceanic islands, Ecography, 33, 285, 10.1111/j.1600-0587.2010.06203.x · DOI
  10. Copsey, J.A., Black, S.A., Groombridge, J.J., and Jones, C.G. (2018). Species Conservation: Lessons from Islands, Cambridge University Press. Ecology, Biodiversity and Conservation. · DOI
  11. Jupiter, 2014, Conservation of Biodiversity in the Pacific Islands of Oceania: Challenges and Opportunities, Pac. Conserv. Biol., 20, 206, 10.1071/PC140206 · DOI
  12. Privet, 2020, Non-native spiders change assemblages of Hawaiian forest fragment kipuka over space and time, NeoBiota, 55, 1, 10.3897/neobiota.55.48498 · DOI
  13. Raven, 2021, Agricultural intensification and climate change are rapidly decreasing insect biodiversity, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 118, e2002548117, 10.1073/pnas.2002548117 · DOI
  14. Causton, 2006, Alien Insects: Threats and Implications for Conservation of Galápagos Islands, Ann. Entomol. Soc. Am., 99, 121, 10.1603/0013-8746(2006)099[0121:AITAIF]2.0.CO;2 · DOI
  15. Cronk, 1997, Islands: Stability, diversity, conservation, Biodivers. Conserv., 6, 477, 10.1023/A:1018372910025 · DOI
  16. Sax, 2002, Species Invasions Exceed Extinctions on Islands Worldwide: A Comparative Study of Plants and Birds, Am. Nat., 160, 766, 10.1086/343877 · DOI
  17. Silva, 2006, A Quantitative Approach to the Study of Non-indigenous Plants: An Example from the Azores Archipelago, Biodivers. Conserv., 15, 1661, 10.1007/s10531-004-5015-z · DOI
  18. Borges, 2010, The Azorean Biodiversity Portal: An internet database for regional biodiversity outreach, Null, 8, 423
  19. Borges, 2020, Increase of insular exotic arthropod diversity is a fundamental dimension of the current biodiversity crisis, Insect Conserv. Divers., 13, 508, 10.1111/icad.12431 · DOI
  20. Borges, 2005, Ranking protected areas in the Azores using standardised sampling of soil epigean arthropods, Biodivers. Conserv., 14, 2029, 10.1007/s10531-004-4283-y · DOI
  21. Gaspar, 2011, Selection of priority areas for arthropod conservation in the Azores archipelago, J. Insect Conserv., 15, 671, 10.1007/s10841-010-9365-4 · DOI
  22. Fattorini, 2017, Endemism in historical biogeography and conservation biology: Concepts and implications, Biogeogr. J. Integr. Biogeogr., 32, 47, 10.21426/B632136433 · DOI
  23. Ferreira, 2016, Effects of climate change on the distribution of indigenous species in oceanic islands (Azores), Clim. Chang., 138, 603, 10.1007/s10584-016-1754-6 · DOI
  24. Elias, 2016, Natural zonal vegetation of the Azores Islands: Characterization and potential distribution, Phytocoenologia, 46, 107, 10.1127/phyto/2016/0132 · DOI
  25. Cardoso, 2009, A spatial scale assessment of habitat effects on arthropod communities of an oceanic island, Acta Oecologica, 35, 590, 10.1016/j.actao.2009.05.005 · DOI · Paper page
  26. Florencio, 2016, The role of plant fidelity and land-use changes on island exotic and indigenous canopy spiders at local and regional scales, Biol. Invasions, 18, 2309, 10.1007/s10530-016-1162-x · DOI
  27. Florencio, M., Lobo, J.M., Cardoso, P., Almeida-Neto, M., and Borges, P.A.V. (2015). The Colonisation of Exotic Species Does Not Have to Trigger Faunal Homogenisation: Lessons from the Assembly Patterns of Arthropods on Oceanic Islands. PLoS ONE, 10. · DOI
  28. Florencio, 2013, Arthropod assemblage homogenization in oceanic islands: The role of indigenous and exotic species under landscape disturbance, Divers. Distrib., 19, 1450, 10.1111/ddi.12121 · DOI
  29. Meijer, 2011, The effects of land-use change on arthropod richness and abundance on Santa Maria Island (Azores): Unmanaged plantations favour endemic beetles, J. Insect Conserv., 15, 505, 10.1007/s10841-010-9330-2 · DOI · Paper page
  30. Hill, 1973, Diversity and Evenness: A Unifying Notation and Its Consequences, Ecology, 54, 427, 10.2307/1934352 · DOI
  31. Chao, 2014, Unifying Species Diversity, Phylogenetic Diversity, Functional Diversity, and Related Similarity and Differentiation Measures Through Hill Numbers, Annu. Rev. Ecol. Evol. Syst., 45, 297, 10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-120213-091540 · DOI
  32. Matthews, 2019, Differential temporal beta-diversity patterns of native and non-native arthropod species in a fragmented native forest landscape, Ecography, 42, 45, 10.1111/ecog.03812 · DOI
  33. Artega, 2020, Arthropod diversity in two Historic Gardens in the Azores, Portugal, Biodivers. Data J., 8, e54749, 10.3897/BDJ.8.e54749 · DOI
  34. Borges, 2018, Biota from the coastal wetlands of Praia da Vitória (Terceira, Azores, Portugal): Part 1—Arthropods, Biodivers. Data J., 6, e27194, 10.3897/BDJ.6.e27194 · DOI
  35. Borges, 2017, Cryptic diversity in the Azorean beetle genus Tarphius Erichson, 1845 (Coleoptera: Zopheridae): An integrative taxonomic approach with description of four new species, Zootaxa, 4236, 401, 10.11646/zootaxa.4236.3.1 · DOI
  36. Borges, 2017, Conservation status of the forest beetles (Insecta, Coleoptera) from Azores, Portugal, Biodivers. Data J., 5, e14557, 10.3897/BDJ.5.e14557 · DOI
  37. Marcelino, 2021, Standardised arthropod (Arthropoda) inventory across natural and anthropogenic impacted habitats in the Azores archipelago, Biodivers. Data J., 9, e62157, 10.3897/BDJ.9.e62157 · DOI · Paper page
  38. Rego, C., Boieiro, M., Rigal, F., Ribeiro, S.P., Cardoso, P., and Borges, P.A.V. (2019). Taxonomic and functional diversity of insect herbivore assemblages associated with the canopy-dominant trees of the Azorean native forest. PLoS ONE, 14. · DOI
  39. Otto, 2011, A reconstruction of Palaeo-Macaronesia, with particular reference to the long-term biogeography of the Atlantic island laurel forests, J. Biogeogr., 38, 226, 10.1111/j.1365-2699.2010.02427.x · DOI
  40. Gaspar, 2008, Diversity and distribution of arthropods in native forests of the Azores archipelago, Arquipel. Life Mar. Sci., 25, 1
  41. Fattorini, S., Cardoso, P., Rigal, F., and Borges, P.A.V. (2012). Use of Arthropod Rarity for Area Prioritisation: Insights from the Azorean Islands. PLoS ONE, 7. · DOI
  42. Hsieh, 2016, iNEXT: An R package for rarefaction and extrapolation of species diversity (Hill numbers), Methods Ecol. Evol., 7, 1451, 10.1111/2041-210X.12613 · DOI
  43. Carvalho, 2013, Measuring fractions of beta diversity and their relationships to nestedness: A theoretical and empirical comparison of novel approaches, Oikos, 122, 825, 10.1111/j.1600-0706.2012.20980.x · DOI
  44. Legendre, 2013, Beta diversity as the variance of community data: Dissimilarity coefficients and partitioning, Ecol. Lett., 16, 951, 10.1111/ele.12141 · DOI
  45. Legendre, 2014, Interpreting the replacement and richness difference components of beta diversity, Glob. Ecol. Biogeogr., 23, 1324, 10.1111/geb.12207 · DOI · Paper page
  46. Searcy, 2006, The distribution and habitat preferences of introduced species in the mount Holyoke range, Hampshire co., Massachusetts, Rhodora, 108, 43, 10.3119/04-16.1 · DOI
  47. Gaston, 2006, Abundance, spatial variance and occupancy: Arthropod species distribution in the Azores, J. Anim. Ecol., 75, 646, 10.1111/j.1365-2656.2006.01085.x · DOI
  48. Rigal, 2013, Integration of non-indigenous species within the interspecific abundance–occupancy relationship, Acta Oecologica, 48, 69, 10.1016/j.actao.2013.02.003 · DOI
  49. Ribeiro, 2005, Canopy insect herbivores in the Azorean Laurisilva forests: Key host plant species in a highly generalist insect community, Ecography, 28, 315, 10.1111/j.0906-7590.2005.04104.x · DOI
  50. Quartau, 2003, A new species of the genus Aphrodes Curtis from the Azores (Hemiptera, Cicadellidae), Bocagiana, 213, 1
  51. Borges, 2008, Spider biodiversity patterns and their conservation in the Azorean archipelago, with descriptions of new species, Null, 6, 249
  52. Broadhead, 1985, The Diversity of Psocoptera in Two Tropical Forests in Panama, J. Anim. Ecol., 54, 739, 10.2307/4375 · DOI
  53. Jaenike, 1990, Host Specialization in Phytophagous Insects, Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst., 21, 243, 10.1146/annurev.es.21.110190.001331 · DOI
  54. Manica, 2009, Stochastic and deterministic processes jointly structure tropical arthropod communities, Ecol. Lett., 12, 277, 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2009.01284.x · DOI
  55. Lessard, 2012, Strong influence of regional species pools on continent-wide structuring of local communities, Proc. R. Soc. B Biol. Sci., 279, 266, 10.1098/rspb.2011.0552 · DOI
  56. Segre, 2014, Competitive exclusion, beta diversity, and deterministic vs. stochastic drivers of community assembly, Ecol. Lett., 17, 1400, 10.1111/ele.12343 · DOI
  57. Gillespie, 2002, Arthropods on Islands: Colonization, Speciation, and Conservation, Annu. Rev. Entomol., 47, 595, 10.1146/annurev.ento.47.091201.145244 · DOI
  58. Kremen, 1993, Terrestrial Arthropod Assemblages: Their Use in Conservation Planning, Conserv. Biol., 7, 796, 10.1046/j.1523-1739.1993.740796.x · DOI
  59. McNeill, 1993, Single Large or Several Small Marine Reserves? An Experimental Approach with Seagrass Fauna, J. Biogeogr., 20, 429, 10.2307/2845591 · DOI
  60. 2010, How to resolve the SLOSS debate: Lessons from species-diversity models, J. Theor. Biol., 264, 604, 10.1016/j.jtbi.2010.02.009 · DOI
  61. Capano, 2019, The emergence of private land conservation in scientific literature: A review, Biol. Conserv., 237, 191, 10.1016/j.biocon.2019.07.010 · DOI
  62. Kamal, 2015, Challenges and opportunities in biodiversity conservation on private land: An institutional perspective from Central Europe and North America, Biodivers. Conserv., 24, 1271, 10.1007/s10531-014-0857-5 · DOI
  63. Shumba, 2020, Effectiveness of private land conservation areas in maintaining natural land cover and biodiversity intactness, Glob. Ecol. Conserv., 22, e00935

Cited by

See all 27

Metadata

Authors
Tsafack, N., Fattorini, S., Boieiro, M., Rigal, F., Ros-Prieto, A., Ferreira, M. T., & Borges, P. A. V.
Affiliations
  • cE3c—Centre for Ecology, Evolution and Environmental Changes/Azorean Biodiversity Group, Faculty of Agriculture and Environment, Department of Environmental Sciences and Engineering, Universidade dos Açores, 9700-042 Angra do Heroismo, Azores, Portugal
  • Department of Life, Health and Environmental Sciences, University of L’Aquila, Via Vetoio, 67100 L’Aquila, Italy
  • Institut des Sciences Analytiques et de Physico-Chimie pour l’Environnement et les Matériaux, CNRS-Université de Pau et des Pays de l’Adour, E2S, UMR 5254, BP, CEDEX, 64000 Pau, France
  • Project LIFE BEETLES (LIFE 18 NAT/PT/000864), Regional Secretariat of Environment and Climate Change, Rua do Galo n118, 9700-040 Angra do Heroismo, Azores, Portugal
ORCID
Venue
Diversity
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2021-09-16
Volume
13
Issue
9
Pages
443
ISSN
1424-2818
DOI
10.3390/d13090443
Cited by
27
References
1
Language
en
Licence
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (vor)
Funders
  • Secretaria Regional do Ambiente e Alterações Climáticas (LIFE-BETTLES (LIFE18 NAT_PT_000864), LIFE IP AZORES NATURA (LIFE17 IPE/PT/000010))
  • Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (FCT-NETBIOME–ISLANDBIODIV grant 0003/2011, UID/BIA/00329/2013-2020-24)
  • FEDER (AZORESBIOPORTAL–PORBIOTA (ACORES-01-0145-FEDER-000072))

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.