MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2012944939 · doi:10.1139/b00-133

Flower orientation in <i>Pachycereus pringlei</i>

2000· article· en· W2012944939 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Clara Tinoco‐Ojanguren, Francisco Molina‐Freaner

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Botany · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBotanical Research and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersConsejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología
KeywordsInterceptionBotanyBiologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The orientation of flowers in columnar cacti has been a subject of great interest to plant biologists. The interpretation of this pattern has invoked warmer temperatures as the underlying factor. In this paper, we describe flower orientation in two populations of Pachycereus pringlei (S. Watson) Britton & Rose and propose a hypothesis of the underlying mechanism. Stems from the two populations showed a significant mean direction of their flowers, with most flowers (70-77%) present between 90 and 270°. Photosynthetic photon flux density interception and stem temperature reached maximum values on south-facing ribs, showing concordance with flower orientation. We suggest that PFD interception, through its influence on CO 2 uptake and stem temperature, is the major factor underlying the observed orientation of flowers in P. pringlei.Key words: columnar cacti, flower orientation, Pachycereus pringlei, PFD interception.

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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations18
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of BotanySame topicBotanical Research and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207