MétaCan
Menu
Cohort builder

4,299,418 works, Canadian by any of four routes.

Every filter state is a URL; the URL is the query; the query is citable via /q/⟨hash⟩. The page, the API and the export parse the same parameters.

The current cohort, streamed from the database: every work column, the machine labels, the provisional scores, and the per-row validation status. Exports are capped at 100,000 rows. Mints a permanent /q/ link for this exact query. The same filters always produce the same link, whoever asks.

Search term
Author
Year range
Sort
Language
Type
Field
Venue
Topic
Plant Reproductive Biology
Retraction
Abstract
Evidence source
Study design
Label agreement
Label status

Direct Codex and Gemma labels are unvalidated and sparse. Distilled predictions cover the full frame and are also unvalidated. Choose the evidence source explicitly; absence of a direct label is never a negative label.

affaffiliation
fundfunder
venuejournal
aboutaboutness

The four routes compose: require the funder route and exclude affiliation to get the funder-only stratum no affiliation-based frame ever sees.

979 results · 1 filter active ·
Results by year
20002025
Publication date
Categories
Machine labels · sparse coverage
Evidence
Language
Type
Citations
An unlabeled work is unknown, not a negative. Label coverage is reported on every query.
979 works in the cohort · of 4,299,418page 2 of 20

Labels cover 2 of 979 works in this cohort. The rest are unlabeled, which is not a negative label: the label table is sparse today and grows as labeling rounds land.

Distilled predictions cover 979 of 979 works in this cohort. Predictions are machine_predicted_unvalidated. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work (title-only); the Codex side is a distilled, calibrated classifier. Candidate is the union; consensus is the intersection.

afffundno abstractunlabeled
Under pressure, cell walls set the pace
Lawrence J. Winship, Gerhard Obermeyer, Anja Geitmann, Peter K. Hepler
2010· article· en· Trends in Plant Science· Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
113
citations
afffundunlabeled
Proteomic analysis of tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum) pollen
I. S. Sheoran, Andrew R. S. Ross, Douglas J. H. Olson, V. K. Sawhney
2007· article· en· Journal of Experimental Botany· Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
111
citations
affno abstractunlabeled
Pollen Acceptance or Rejection: A Tale of Two Pathways
Jennifer Doucet, Hyun Kyung Lee, Daphne R. Goring
2016· review· en· Trends in Plant Science· Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
109
citations
affno abstractunlabeled
Growth and development of conifer pollen tubes
Danilo D. Fernando, Mark D. Lazzaro, John N. Owens
2005· article· en· Sexual Plant Reproduction· Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
107
citations
affno abstractunlabeled
Transport Logistics in Pollen Tubes
Youssef Chebli, Jens Kroeger, Anja Geitmann
2013· review· en· Molecular Plant· Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
97
citations
affno abstractunlabeled
The kisspeptin (KiSS-1)/GPR54 system in cancer biology
Angeliki Makri, Nikolaos Pissimissis, Peter Lembessis, Constantin Polychronakos, Michael Koutsilieris
2008· review· en· Cancer Treatment Reviews· Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
machine prediction:candidate · noneconsensus · none
94
citations

How this was built: Screen · Findings · About