The Biology of Invasive Alien Plants in Canada. 3. <i>Amaranthus tuberculatus</i> (Moq.) Sauer var. <i>rudis</i> (Sauer) Costea & Tardif
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This annual dioecious weed was found in 2002 and 2003 infesting soybean fields in southwestern Ontario, and it was collected in 1992 from waste places in British Columbia. It is a major weed problem in field crops in the mid-western United States, where it has become increasingly difficult to control during the past 10 yr. Morphological differences between Amaranthus tuberculatus var. rudis and var. tuberculatus are presented. A review of the biological information published is provided. Plants exhibit high phenotypic plasticity and genetic variability. Emergence is prolonged, growth rapid, and female plants produce a large number of viable seeds that contribute to a persistent seed bank. Amaranthus tuberculatus var. rudis has developed multiple resistance to triazine and acetolactate synthase- and protoporphyrinogen-inhibiting herbicides. Airborne pollen can travel significant distances and A. tuberculatus var. rudis may hybridize with other noxious Amaranthus spp. transferring herbicide resistance or other traits. Key words: Amaranthus tuberculatus var. rudis, AMATA, Amaranthus rudis, common waterhemp, weed biology, invasive alien
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".