Validating a rapid algorithmic weed hazard ranking method.
IF 3.8
1区 农林科学
Q1 AGRONOMY
Christopher E Buddenhagen,Graeme Bourdôt,Shona Lamoureaux,Alasdair Noble,Murray I Dawson,Craig B Phillips
求助PDF
{"title":"Validating a rapid algorithmic weed hazard ranking method.","authors":"Christopher E Buddenhagen,Graeme Bourdôt,Shona Lamoureaux,Alasdair Noble,Murray I Dawson,Craig B Phillips","doi":"10.1002/ps.70201","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND\r\nConventional weed risk assessments (WRAs) are time-consuming and often constrained by species-specific data gaps. We present a validated, algorithmic alternative, the CPG $$ \\boldsymbol{CPG} $$ model, that integrates climatic suitability ( C $$ \\boldsymbol{C} $$ ), weed-related publication frequency (P) and global occurrence data ( G $$ \\boldsymbol{G} $$ ), using publicly available databases and artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted text screening with a large language model (LLM).\r\n\r\nRESULTS\r\nThe CPG $$ CPG $$ model was tested against independent weed hazard classifications for New Zealand and California. In New Zealand, 89% of 480 randomly selected plant taxa had sufficient data to generate scores, which aligned well with expert classifications and moderately with outputs from the 48-question WRA [Pheloung PC, Williams PA, and Halloy SR. Journal of Environmental Management 57:239-251 (1999)]. For more than 5000 species assessed using Randall's 14-criteria generalised risk mode [Randall RP, 20th Australasian Weeds Conference: 5-12 (2016)], all CPG $$ CPG $$ variables were informative. The model also showed strong agreement with the 19-criteria California weed hazard system. Multinomial regression and receiver operator characteristic curve (ROC) analyses confirmed consistent predictive performance, with true-positive rates from 0.69 to 0.90 and true-negative rates from 0.71 to 0.97. It effectively distinguished high- from low-hazard species. Sensitivity analysis showed that as evidence for weediness increased, score stability improved, supporting robust rankings for high-hazard species.\r\n\r\nCONCLUSION\r\nThe CPG $$ \\boldsymbol{CPG} $$ model offers a transparent, scalable and cost-effective tool for early-stage weed hazard screening. It delivers substantial time savings over attribute-based WRAs while maintaining alignment with expert evaluations. The model enables rapid triage of large species lists, including actual or potentially introduced taxa under current and future climates, supporting prioritisation for detailed risk or management feasibility assessments. Its automation and reproducibility make it a valuable tool for global biosecurity and invasive species management. © 2025 The Author(s). Pest Management Science published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society of Chemical Industry.","PeriodicalId":218,"journal":{"name":"Pest Management Science","volume":"37 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pest Management Science","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/ps.70201","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AGRONOMY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
引用
批量引用
Abstract
BACKGROUND
Conventional weed risk assessments (WRAs) are time-consuming and often constrained by species-specific data gaps. We present a validated, algorithmic alternative, the CPG $$ \boldsymbol{CPG} $$ model, that integrates climatic suitability ( C $$ \boldsymbol{C} $$ ), weed-related publication frequency (P) and global occurrence data ( G $$ \boldsymbol{G} $$ ), using publicly available databases and artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted text screening with a large language model (LLM).
RESULTS
The CPG $$ CPG $$ model was tested against independent weed hazard classifications for New Zealand and California. In New Zealand, 89% of 480 randomly selected plant taxa had sufficient data to generate scores, which aligned well with expert classifications and moderately with outputs from the 48-question WRA [Pheloung PC, Williams PA, and Halloy SR. Journal of Environmental Management 57:239-251 (1999)]. For more than 5000 species assessed using Randall's 14-criteria generalised risk mode [Randall RP, 20th Australasian Weeds Conference: 5-12 (2016)], all CPG $$ CPG $$ variables were informative. The model also showed strong agreement with the 19-criteria California weed hazard system. Multinomial regression and receiver operator characteristic curve (ROC) analyses confirmed consistent predictive performance, with true-positive rates from 0.69 to 0.90 and true-negative rates from 0.71 to 0.97. It effectively distinguished high- from low-hazard species. Sensitivity analysis showed that as evidence for weediness increased, score stability improved, supporting robust rankings for high-hazard species.
CONCLUSION
The CPG $$ \boldsymbol{CPG} $$ model offers a transparent, scalable and cost-effective tool for early-stage weed hazard screening. It delivers substantial time savings over attribute-based WRAs while maintaining alignment with expert evaluations. The model enables rapid triage of large species lists, including actual or potentially introduced taxa under current and future climates, supporting prioritisation for detailed risk or management feasibility assessments. Its automation and reproducibility make it a valuable tool for global biosecurity and invasive species management. © 2025 The Author(s). Pest Management Science published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society of Chemical Industry.
验证一种快速杂草危害排序算法。
背景:传统的杂草风险评估(WRAs)耗时长,而且常常受到特定物种数据缺口的限制。我们提出了一种经过验证的算法替代方案,CPG $$ \boldsymbol{CPG} $$模型,该模型集成了气候适宜性(C $$ \boldsymbol{C} $$),杂草相关出版频率(P)和全球发生数据(G $$ \boldsymbol{G} $$),使用公开可用的数据库和人工智能(AI)辅助的文本筛选与大型语言模型(LLM)。结果CPG $$ CPG $$模型在新西兰和加利福尼亚的独立杂草危害分类中进行了检验。在新西兰,有89人% of 480 randomly selected plant taxa had sufficient data to generate scores, which aligned well with expert classifications and moderately with outputs from the 48-question WRA [Pheloung PC, Williams PA, and Halloy SR. Journal of Environmental Management 57:239-251 (1999)]. For more than 5000 species assessed using Randall's 14-criteria generalised risk mode [Randall RP, 20th Australasian Weeds Conference: 5-12 (2016)], all CPG $$ CPG $$ variables were informative. The model also showed strong agreement with the 19-criteria California weed hazard system. Multinomial regression and receiver operator characteristic curve (ROC) analyses confirmed consistent predictive performance, with true-positive rates from 0.69 to 0.90 and true-negative rates from 0.71 to 0.97. It effectively distinguished high- from low-hazard species. Sensitivity analysis showed that as evidence for weediness increased, score stability improved, supporting robust rankings for high-hazard species.CONCLUSIONThe CPG $$ \boldsymbol{CPG} $$ model offers a transparent, scalable and cost-effective tool for early-stage weed hazard screening. It delivers substantial time savings over attribute-based WRAs while maintaining alignment with expert evaluations. The model enables rapid triage of large species lists, including actual or potentially introduced taxa under current and future climates, supporting prioritisation for detailed risk or management feasibility assessments. Its automation and reproducibility make it a valuable tool for global biosecurity and invasive species management. © 2025 The Author(s). Pest Management Science published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Society of Chemical Industry.
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。