MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2118724220 · doi:10.1093/aob/mct157

Ecological significance and complexity of N-source preference in plants

2013· article· en· W2118724220 on OpenAlexafffund
Dev T. Britto, Herbert J. Kronzucker

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Botany · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant nutrient uptake and metabolism
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsPreferenceBiologySimple (philosophy)EcologyBiochemical engineeringStatisticsMathematicsEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Plants can utilize two major forms of inorganic N: NO3(-) (nitrate) and NH4(+) (ammonium). In some cases, the preference of one form over another (denoted as β) can appear to be quite pronounced for a plant species, and can be an important determinant and predictor of its distribution and interactions with other species. In many other cases, however, assignment of preference is not so straightforward and must take into account a wide array of complex physiological and environmental features, which interact in ways that are still not well understood. SCOPE: This Viewpoint presents a discussion of the key, and often co-occurring, factors that join to produce the complex phenotypic composite referred to by the deceptively simple term 'N-source preference'. CONCLUSIONS: N-source preference is much more complex a biological phenomenon than is often assumed, and general models predicting how it will influence ecological processes will need to be much more sophisticated than those that have been so far developed.

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)0.002
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.145
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.118 · 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

Citations323
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of BotanySame topicPlant nutrient uptake and metabolismFrench-language works237,207