MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Variation in germination response within Scotch thistle,<i>Onopordum acanthium</i>L., populations matured under greenhouse and field conditions

2000· article· en· W1555567495 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Mirwais M. Qaderi, Paul B. Cavers

Bibliographic record

VenueEcoscience · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSeed Germination and Physiology
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsGerminationGreenhouseBiologyPopulationThistleHorticultureGrowing seasonAgronomyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The effects of two maturation conditions (greenhouse and field) on germination percentages and rates were determined for cypselas (seeds) of Scotch thistle, Onopordum acanthium L. Four collections from each of three populations were tested in 1996 and 1997 (one of the same 1996 populations was used again in 1997, but two were different). Cypselas from all collections were incubated within three days of collection at 25˚C and 10˚C, for 14 hours light, and 10 hours dark, respectively. In general, cypselas that matured under warmer temperatures (greenhouse) germinated at higher percentages than those that matured under cooler temperatures (field). For example, in the Environmental Sciences Western (ESW) population at least five times as many cypselas from each greenhouse collection germinated than from the comparable field collection. Cypselas that matured early in the season were usually more germinable than those that matured later. However, field-produced cypselas from half of the populations had the opposite trend. Overall, all populations that matured under warmer conditions germinated at higher percentages than those matured under cooler conditions. Germination rates showed no clear trends among collections or between greenhouse- and field-matured cypselas.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.983
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.244 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations29
Published2000
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcoscienceSame topicSeed Germination and PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207