The Biology of Invasive Alien Plants in Canada. 2. <i>Cynanchum rossicum</i> (Kleopow) Borhidi [= <i>Vincetoxicum rossicum</i> (Kleopow) Barbar.] and <i>Cynanchum louiseae</i> (L.) Kartesz & Gandhi [= <i>Vincetoxicum nigrum</i> (L.) Moench]
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cynanchum rossicum (dog-strangling vine) and C. louiseae (black dog-strangling vine) are introduced, perennial herbs or small twining vines in the Milkweed family (Asclepiadaceae). Generic placement of these two species has been problematic, but are here treated as members of Cynanchum subgenus Vincetoxicum. The species occur primarily in natural upland areas, including understories of woodlands, pastures, old fields, shores, flood plains and ruderal areas of southern Ontario and Quebec and the northeastern United States. Ecosystems on well-drained, stony soils are often densely colonized, but both species can tolerate a wide moisture regime. Plants establish in full sun or under forest canopies and may form monospecific stands in all light conditions. They often form dense colonies which smother other vegetation and reduce invertebrate and vertebrate biodiversity. Reproduction is by polyembryonic, wind-dispersed seeds. Effective control is primarily by herbicides, since mechanical control is difficult and no biological control agents have been developed. A third European species, C. vincetoxicum, has been reported as an occasional garden escape in southern Ontario and the northeastern United States, but has not yet become naturalized. Information on this species is included because of its close relationship with C. rossicum and its better known biology. Key words: Dog-strangling vine, swallow-wort, Cynanchum, Vincetoxicum, CYKNI, invasive plant, weed biology
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".