Wild Parsnip (<i>Pastinaca sativa</i>): A Troublesome Species of Increasing Concern
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although many of us fondly associate parsnips with a rustic, home-cooked meal, there is also a wild variety that is increasingly causing problems as a weed in North America. The cultivated variety is a subspecies of Pastinaca sativa (Pastinaca sativa ssp. sativa) and contains lower amounts of the problematic furanocoumarins than the wild version. Wild parsnip (Pastinaca sativa L. PAVSA) is an introduced facultative biennial from Eurasia. It has spread throughout the United States and southern Canada and is now colonizing old fields, railroad embankments, roadsides, and waste areas. Wild parsnip contains furanocoumarins, which deter herbivores from eating its foliage. These compounds can also cause phytophotodermatitis in humans and livestock, a condition that results in patches of redness and blisters on the skin when they come into contact with the sap or ingest parts of the plant in the presence of sunlight. Few people, including medical professionals, recognize the plant or associate it with the burns it causes. Recently, wild parsnip has received increasing attention as expanding populations have resulted in more frequent human and livestock contact with the plant. This article reviews important aspects of the etymology, distribution, history, biology, and management of wild parsnip. A key objective of this review is to raise awareness of the potential health problems caused by wild parsnip and to stimulate research that will lead to effective management of this increasingly problematic 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".