MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1827557930 · doi:10.1139/b11-057

Prolonged dormancy in the geophyte <i>Allium amplectens</i> on Vancouver Island

2011· article· en· W1827557930 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Allan R. Hawryzki, Geraldine A. Allen, Joseph A. Antos

Bibliographic record

VenueBotany · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersCanadian Forest Service
KeywordsDormancyBiologyBotanyGrowing seasonHorticultureGermination

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Prolonged dormancy occurs when a plant fails to appear above ground during the growing season. Although it may be an important life history trait of many geophytes, studies focusing on prolonged dormancy are infrequent and are concentrated on the Orchidaceae even though the phenomenon occurs in many taxonomic groups. We tracked individual plants of Allium amplectens (Amaryllidaceae) in permanent plots on Vancouver Island, which allowed us to determine rates of prolonged dormancy during a 4-year period. Dormancy rates per year averaged 38% and differed substantially among years. Over 70% of plants had a dormant period during the study. Dormancy periods of 2 years were almost as frequent as 1-year periods, and 8% of plants were dormant for 3 years. Plant density, which included small plants that we could not track in the plots, varied much more among years than did dormancy of tracked plants, suggesting that small plants may be especially prone to dormancy. High rates of prolonged dormancy and frequent multiyear dormancy indicate that this is an important life history feature of A. amplectens. We suggest that prolonged dormancy contributes to the ability of this species, and probably other species, to persist in dry habitats with fluctuating resources.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.838
Threshold uncertainty score0.322

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.144 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations8
Published2011
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBotanySame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207