MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2011548949 · doi:10.1139/x06-092

Variation in timing of bud-burst of<i>Ulmus minor</i>clones from different geographical origins

2006· article· en· W2011548949 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Luisa Ghelardini, M. Falusi, Alberto Santini

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Physiology and Cultivation Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDormancyBiologyAltitude (triangle)PhenologyLatitudeBotanyChilling requirementCupressaceaeHorticultureGerminationGeographyPollen

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The vegetative bud-burst phenology of field elm (Ulmus minor Mill.) clones originating from a large geographical range within the species natural area was studied at three European sites over a 5-year period in ex situ collections constituted for the conservation of elm genetic resources. At all the sites and in all the years of study, the date of bud burst and the required thermal time to bud burst were directly related to latitude and altitude of origin of the clones. Nevertheless, the differences among origins were reduced with increasing the chilling duration, suggesting that the clones from more northern latitudes and higher altitudes required longer chilling for dormancy release. Analyses of variance performed on selected groups of clones from different latitudinal origins showed that the order of bud burst was stable among years and that the thermal time requirements decreased in all the groups with increasing chilling, with significant differences among groups; southern clones satisfied their chilling requirements after a shorter chilling duration.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.364
Threshold uncertainty score0.911

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations28
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicPlant Physiology and Cultivation StudiesFrench-language works237,207