MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2095679727 · doi:10.1139/b05-098

Phylogenetic relationships and character evolution in <i>Govenia</i> (Orchidaceae)

2005· article· en· W2095679727 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Javier García‐Cruz, Victoria Sosa

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Botany · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyMonophylyOrchidaceaeBotanyPollinatorPollinationInflorescenceNectarSepalCapitataPhylogenetic treeCladePollenStamen

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Govenia Lindl. (Orchidaceae) is a neotropical terrestrial deciduous genus of approximately 28 species of the higher Epidendroids. To determine if Govenia is monophyletic and what are the relationships among its species, a phylogenetic analysis based on a detailed morphological study was conducted. Furthermore, the evolution of eight vegetative and floral characters is explored and explained in relation to pollination syndrome. Three most parsimonious trees were retrieved from heuristic searches. Govenia is corroborated as monophyletic with six recognized groups: three monotypic groups (G. ciliilabia, G. powellii, and G. boliviensis) and three major clades (Purpusii, Capitata, and Superba groups). The Purpusii group is characterized by a well-developed rhizome, a solitary leaf, and 3–12 white flowers. The Capitata group is characterized by the lack of a rhizome, two leaves, and 10–30 white flowers. The Superba group is characterized by the lack of a rhizome, two leaves, and numerous yellow flowers. Two trends were identified in Govenia. The first trend is represented by plants with a rhizome and reduced leaf and flower numbers that occur in taxa from the Purpusii group. The second trend has been to increase inflorescence length and the number of flowers, to change flower colour from white to yellow with an ascending position of the column, and is represented in taxa from the Superba group. The evolution of floral characters leads to the hypothesis that there was a shift in pollinator from small bumblebees to larger bumblebees.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.179
Teacher spread0.150 · 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 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

Citations14
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of BotanySame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207