MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2025152807 · doi:10.1071/bt04186

A technique to estimate the pre-fire depth of burial of Grevillea seeds by using seedlings after fire

2005· article· en· W2025152807 on OpenAlexaff
Tony D. Auld, Andrew J. Denham

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian Journal of Botany · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
Canadian institutionsDepartment of Environment and Conservation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSeedlingGerminationHypocotylShrubBiologyRadicleAcaciaBotanyAgronomyHorticultureEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In a glasshouse experiment, we used the shrub Grevillea speciosa to examine the reliability of estimating the depth of seed burial based on the distance from the soil surface to the junction of the swollen hypocotyl with the radicle. We then examined the applicability of the technique in the field by using post-fire seedling emergence. We found that the mean length of the swollen hypocotyl in seedlings was a good predictor of the depth of seed burial (R2 = 0.97). Most variation occurred for seeds buried near the surface at 2-cm depth, where the swollen hypocotyl overestimated the depth of seed burial by about 1 cm. There was a decline in the ability of seeds to successfully emerge from soil depths below 2 cm, with seedlings of G. speciosa able to emerge from soil depths up to 8 cm in the glasshouse. This corresponds with the estimated maximum emergence depth based on seed mass. In the field, seedlings were estimated to have emerged from depths of 1–7 cm after an intense wildfire. There was an approximately normal distribution of seedling emergence depths; however, the mode of this distribution varied among locations. The technique gave comparable results to a similar technique developed for Acacia spp., allowing consideration of a greater range of species and post-fire locations. Use of the technique has the potential to provide insights into the impacts of fires below ground, including the nature of post-fire germination, residual soil seed banks, the depth-related action of fire-induced germination cues and small-scale spatial variation.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations11
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAustralian Journal of BotanySame topicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics StudiesFrench-language works237,207