MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2016825978 · doi:10.1111/nph.12634

Rapid evolution of an invasive weed

2013· article· en· W2016825978 on OpenAlexafffund
Kathryn G. Turner, Loren H. Rieseberg

Bibliographic record

VenueNew Phytologist · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBiologyAbiotic componentInvasive speciesHerbivoreEcologyAbiotic stressRange (aeronautics)WeedPopulationDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Trade-offs between performance and the ability to tolerate abiotic and biotic stress have been suggested to explain both the success of invasive species and phenotypic differentiation between native and invasive populations. It is critical to sample broadly across both ranges and to account for latitudinal clines and maternal effects when testing this premise. Wild-collected Centaurea diffusa seeds were grown in benign and stressful conditions (drought, flooding, nutrient stress and simulated herbivory), to evaluate whether native and introduced individuals differ in performance or life history phenotypes. A second experiment used glasshouse-grown seeds to evaluate whether patterns remain comparable when maternal environment is consistent. Many traits differed between ranges, and in all cases but one, invasive individuals grew larger, performed better, or matured later. No trade-off in performance with herbivore defense was evident. Invasive populations may have been released from a trade-off between growth and drought tolerance apparent in the native range. Larger individuals with delayed maturity and greater reproductive potential have evolved in invasive populations, a pattern evident across broad population sampling, and after latitude and maternal environment were considered. Release from abiotic stress tolerance trade-offs may be important for the invasion success of Centaurea diffusa.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.072
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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)0.0020.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.218 · 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.

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

Citations95
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNew PhytologistSame topicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics StudiesFrench-language works237,207