The Status and Future of Orchid Conservation in North America<sup>1</sup>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The status and trends of issues related to the conservation of orchids native to the United States, Canada, and Greenland are considered. We focus on nine of the 16 Targets of the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation (GSPC). The first two targets, which all other targets rely upon, appear to have been adequately achieved, in addition to Target 11. Limited progress has been made on six other GSPC targets. Three case studies of efforts to conserve the native threatened orchids, Platanthera leucophaea (Nutt.) Lindl., Isotria medeoloides (Pursh) Raf., and Tolumnia bahamensis (Nash) Braem, are presented to demonstrate the difficulties as well as the issues associated with effective conservation. We describe our efforts to establish an international program to conserve all native orchids in the United States and Canada. The North American Orchid Conservation Center (NAOCC) is an internationally focused effort that is based on public-private partnerships. The goal of NAOCC is to conserve the genetic diversity of all native orchids through efforts to develop an international collection of seeds and orchid fungi. The NAOCC also focuses on the cultivation of all native orchids in an international network of botanic gardens, and they partner with private and public landowners to develop techniques to conserve and restore all native orchid species.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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.
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".