The flora of ultramafic soils in the Australia–Pacific Region: state of knowledge and research priorities
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the Australia–Pacific Region ultramafic outcrops are both widespread and extensive, covering thousands of km2. Soils derived from ultramafic bedrock impose edaphic challenges and are widely known to host highly distinctive floras with high levels of endemism. In the Australia–Pacific Region, the ultramafics of the island of New Caledonia are famed for harbouring 2150 species of vascular plants of which 83% are endemic. Although the ultramafic outcrops in Western Australia are also extensive and harbour 1355 taxa, only 14 species are known to be endemic or have distributions centred on ultramafics. The ultramafic outcrops in New Zealand and Tasmania are small and relatively species-poor. The ultramafic outcrops in Queensland are much larger and host 553 species of which 18 (or possibly 21) species are endemic. Although New Caledonia has a high concentration of Ni hyperaccumulator species (65), only one species from Western Australia and two species from Queensland have so far been found. No Ni hyperaccumulator species are known from Tasmania and New Zealand. Habitat destruction due to forest clearing, uncontrolled fires and nickel mining in New Caledonia impacts on the plant species restricted to ultramafic soils there. In comparison with the nearby floras of New Guinea and South-east Asia, the flora of the Australia–Pacific Region is relatively well studied through the collection of a large number of herbarium specimens. However, there is a need for studies on the evolution of plant lineages on ultramafic soils especially regarding their distinctive morphological characteristics and in relation to hyperaccumulation.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it