MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1775864320 · doi:10.14237/ebl.6.1.2015.288

Traditional Uses of Plants in the Tolfa–Cerite–Manziate Area (Central Italy)

2015· article· en· W1775864320 on OpenAlexaff
Paolo Maria Guarrera, Valentina Savo, Giulia Caneva

Bibliographic record

VenueEthnobiology Letters · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicEthnobotanical and Medicinal Plants Studies
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEthnobotanyGeographyTraditional knowledgeHandicraftAgroforestryPlant speciesMedicinal plantsArchaeologyBiologyEcologyIndigenous

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Traditional knowledge of local plant uses is rapidly fading away, especially in rural Mediterranean areas. We carried out ethnobotanical research in 2010-2011 in order to investigate the local knowledge of wild plants in the Tolfa–Cerite–Manziate area of Italy (Latium, district of Rome). We carried out a total of 45 semi-structured interviews with farmers, herders, and fishers. Here, a simple diachronic comparison is made between the current study and a previous one conducted in some of the villages of the study area to highlight potential losses of traditional knowledge of local plants. We documented a total of 102 plant species, belonging to 48 families, along with their uses (excluding food uses). We also reported some non-plant based remedies that were primarily used in veterinary medicine. Some plant uses, especially for making handicrafts, have not been reported previously (e.g., those of Celtis australis L. Cannabaceae, Betula pendula Roth Betulaceae). Many plant uses are no longer remembered in the area, which indicates a loss of local ethnobotanical knowledge.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.643
Threshold uncertainty score0.146

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.150
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.098 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations17
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEthnobiology LettersSame topicEthnobotanical and Medicinal Plants StudiesFrench-language works237,207