Contributions to an epiphytic lichen flora of northwest North America: I. Eight new species from British Columbia inland rain forests
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent surveys of the inland rain forests of British Columbia and adjacent regions have brought to light an unexpectedly rich epiphytic lichen flora, including several species apparently new to science. In the first of a series of papers, we describe eight species discovered during these surveys as new: Absconditella amabilis T. Sprib. (Ostropales), Bacidina contecta S. Ekman & T. Sprib., Biatora aureolepra T. Sprib. & Tønsberg, Biatora ligni-mollis T. Sprib. & Printzen (all Lecanorales), Collema coniophilum Goward (Peltigerales), Pertusaria diluta C. Björk, G. Thor & T. Wheeler (Pertusariales), Schaereria brunnea C. Björk, T. Sprib. & T. Wheeler (Ostropomycetidae incertae sedis) and Scoliciosporum abietinum T. Sprib. (Lecanorales). We also call attention to a ninth species, Bacidina sp. A, a poorly known and possibly undescribed colonizer of moribund cyanolichens. A majority of the above species appear to be confined to old-growth forests, while two (Biatora ligni-mollis and Schaereria brunnea) are currently known only from “antique” forests older than about 500 years. Many additional undescribed epiphytic lichens are known from inland rain forests, underscoring the need for further baseline biodiversity research in light of its ongoing disappearance as a result of resource extraction. In addition to the eight new species, we report Absconditella celata as new to North America, Absconditella lignicola as new to Canada and Montana, Bacidina chloroticula as new to British Columbia and Gyalideopsis piceicola as new to Montana.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".