MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2062245532 · doi:10.1071/sb06016

The transfer of Dryandra R.Br. to Banksia L.f. (Proteaceae)

2007· article· en· W2062245532 on OpenAlexaff
Austin Mast, Kevin R. Thiele

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian Systematic Botany · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Diversity and Evolution
Canadian institutionsDepartment of Environment and Conservation
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsBanksiaProteaceaeBiologyBotanySubgenusCladeSubspeciesSystematicsHymeniumGenusTaxonomy (biology)ZoologyPhylogenetic treeGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Phylogenies inferred from both chloroplast and nuclear DNA regions have placed the south-west Australian genus Dryandra R. Br. (93 spp.) among the descendents of the most recent common ancestor of the more widespread Australian genus Banksia L.f. (80 spp.). Here we consider the alternative solutions to maintaining monophyly at the generic rank and choose to make new combinations and replacement names for Dryandra in Banksia. We make the new combination Banksia ser. Dryandra in Banksia subgen. Banksia for 108 of the 109 new combinations at the ranks of species, subspecies, and variety and all 18 of the replacement names. We treat Banksia subgen. Banksia as the most inclusive clade that includes the type of Banksia (B. serrata) but not B. integrifolia. We erect Banksia subgen. Spathulatae to accommodate the species in the most inclusive clade that includes B. integrifolia but not B. serrata. These two subgenera of Banksia are equivalent to the clades informally called /Cryptostomata and /Phanerostomata elsewhere. We treat one of the new combinations, Banksia subulata, as incertae sedis within Banksia subgen. Banksia.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.192 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations84
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAustralian Systematic BotanySame topicPlant Diversity and EvolutionFrench-language works237,207