MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2070317294 · doi:10.5558/tfc83402-3

Tree species of concern in New Brunswick, Canada. II. Guidelines for conservation of genetic resources

2007· article· en· W2070317294 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Judy Loo, Tannis Beardmore, J. Dale Simpson, Donnie McPhee

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Forestry Chronicle · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant and Fungal Interactions Research
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources CanadaCanadian Forest Service
FundersCanadian Forest ServiceNatural Resources CanadaU.S. Forest ServiceUniversity of Guelph
KeywordsDutch elm diseaseBeechThreatened speciesEx situ conservationCankerBiologyResistance (ecology)In situ conservationAgroforestryEcologyForestryPopulationEndangered speciesHabitatGeographyBotanyGenetic diversityDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Guidelines were developed by the New Brunswick Forest Gene Conservation Working Group for conserving genetic resources of four native tree species in New Brunswick. Gene conservation guidelines for three of these species aim to maintain sufficient gene pools of known or putatively resistant stock to retain or develop the potential for restoration. Natural populations of American beech (Fagus grandifolia) are known to have genotypes resistant to the beech scale at low frequencies. Gene conservation approaches include in situ and ex situ measures, including resistance breeding. White elm (Ulmus americana) demonstrates a degree of resistance to Dutch elm disease (DED), and will benefit from a mixture of in situ and ex situ conservation measures. Resistance to butternut canker has not yet been demonstrated in populations of butternut (Juglans cinerea), but ex situ conservation of putatively resistant genotypes will be of increasing importance as the frequency of butternut canker escalates. Bur oak (Quercus macrocarpa), threatened by small population size, habitat loss, and ongoing development, requires primarily in situ conservation and restoration efforts. Key words: American beech, bur oak, butternut, disease resistance, ex situ, gene conservation guidelines, genetic resources, in situ, restoration, white elm

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 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 score0.685
Threshold uncertainty score0.792

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.268 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Forestry ChronicleSame topicPlant and Fungal Interactions ResearchFrench-language works237,207