MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2006427845 · doi:10.1017/s0024282914000346

Taxonomic delimitation of the genera <i>Bryoria</i> and <i>Sulcaria</i>, with a new combination <i>Sulcaria spiralifera</i> introduced

2014· article· en· W2006427845 on OpenAlexaff
Leena Myllys, Saara Velmala, Hanna Lindgren, Doug A. Glavich, Tom Carlberg, Li‐Song Wang, Trevor Goward

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Lichenologist · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicLichen and fungal ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaRoyal British Columbia Museum
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSynonym (taxonomy)BiologyParmeliaceaeTaxonomy (biology)Phylogenetic treeZoologyGenusBotanyAscomycotaGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Bryoria pseudocapillaris and B. spiralifera are currently treated as members of Bryoria section Implexae although conspicuous, long and depressed pseudocyphellae characterizing both species resemble those found in the genus Sulcaria. Both genera belong in Parmeliaceae and form an alectorioid group together with Alectoria, Gowardia and Pseudephebe. Parsimony and Bayesian analyses of ITS, partial GAPDH and partial Mcm7 sequence data were used to examine the phylogenetic position of B. pseudocapillaris and B. spiralifera, and in light of these results evaluate the generic delimitation of Bryoria and Sulcaria. A total of 110 specimens of 53 species containing representatives from alectorioid and closely related genera were included in the analyses. The results clearly show first, that both B. pseudocapillaris and B. spiralifera belong in Sulcaria rather than in Bryoria, and second, that they should be considered conspecific. Bryoria pseudocapillaris is proposed as a synonym under B. spiralifera and the name Sulcaria spiralifera comb. nov. is introduced.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.165
Teacher spread0.154 · 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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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