MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1988508565 · doi:10.1639/0007-2745-112.4.673

Lichens and bryophytes of the alpine and subalpine zones on Katahdin, Maine, II: Lichens

2009· article· en· W1988508565 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
James W. Hinds, Alan M. Fryday, Alison C. Dibble

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Bryologist · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicLichen and fungal ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLichenTundraArcticEcologyHabitatGeographyCrustoseTemperate climatePhysical geographyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A total of 293 different lichens (and lichenicolous fungi) were found above an elevation of 884 m on Katahdin during fieldwork from 2000 to 2004 and from study of previously collected herbarium specimens. Thirteen of these are new to North America, 39 additional lichens are new to northeastern United States and 26 additional ones are new to Maine; three additional taxa are almost certainly new to science but are not formally described in this study. We identified eight distinct lichen habitats on Katahdin: (1) A1, exposed alpine tundra and fellfields; (2) A2, high elevation alpine sites protected from northwest winds; (3) A3, east-facing alpine late-snow areas; (4) A4, alpine krummholz; (5) A5, cirque headwalls facing east and north; (6) A6, cirque headwall facing southeast; (7) B1, exposed low-altitude tundra, talus and krummholz; and (8) B2, subalpine forests. Each habitat except A4 had numerous lichens (10–56 taxa) found in none of the others, and each differed statistically from two to six other habitats by a quantitative measure of the Arctic-boreal-temperate (ABT) distribution of its lichens. Habitat A3 had, on average, the most Arctic lichens, followed by A1, A2, A5, B1, A6 and A4, with B2 having the fewest Arctic lichens and the most with a temperate distribution. Lichen ABT values for the eight habitats are well predicted (R2 = 96.9%) by a multiple regression equation incorporating three independent variables: average elevation above sea level of the lichens collected in a habitat class; an estimate of solar gain for each of the eight habitats; and the presence or absence of trees (including krummholz). We compared our results with those for Mt. Albert, Gaspé, Quebec, the only other comprehensive study of alpine lichens in northeastern North America, for such parameters as species presence/absence, substrata and ABT value. We suggest that future studies looking into effects of global warming or increases or decreases in air pollution will be facilitated by the study of certain habitats rather than the entire alpine and subalpine Katahdin region.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.062

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.182 · 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

Citations14
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe BryologistSame topicLichen and fungal ecologyFrench-language works237,207