MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2002592041 · doi:10.1139/b10-071

Spatial distribution and morphology of shoots in the variant crown form of <i>Rhododendron reticulatum</i>

2010· article· en· W2002592041 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kenichi Yoshimura

Bibliographic record

VenueBotany · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsShootCrown (dentistry)BotanyUnderstoryBiologyShrubHorticultureCanopyMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rhododendron reticulatum D. Don ex G.Don is a common understory shrub in western Japan that exhibits highly plastic crown architecture and occurs in various light environments. I investigated how functional differentiation and spatial distribution of long and short shoots contribute to the plasticity of crown architecture of R. reticulatum. Crown form was derived from the crown depth/width ratio. Crown depth/width ratio was higher in sun-lit crowns. In crowns with higher depth/width ratio, long shoots were distributed in upper positions of the crown. Long shoots grew vertically and horizontally. In crowns with lower depth/width ratio, long shoots were arranged in the outer position of the crown and grew outward. Within neighboring shoots, long shoots had less mass than their paired short shoots. Results suggest that long shoots of R. reticulatum function to expand the crown and to reduce leaf overlap in multilayer crowns, which are found in high-light environments, while both long and short shoots function to minimize leaf overlap in monolayer crowns, which are found in shaded environments. Plasticity of crown architecture by altering shoot position and shoot morphology allows growth under various light environments in the forest understory.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.187 · 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

Citations3
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBotanySame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207