MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2119166222 · doi:10.2216/10-94.1

Algae and stomatocysts associated with carnivorous plants. First report of chrysophyte stomatocysts from Virginia, USA

2011· article· en· W2119166222 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Konrad Wołowski, Jolanta Pia̧tek, Bartosz J. Płachno

Bibliographic record

VenuePhycologia · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and Biological Electrophysiology Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCarnivorous plantBiologyAlgaeTaxonEcologyBotanyArchaeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wołowski K., Piątek J. and Płachno B.J. 2011. Algae and stomatocysts associated with carnivorous plants. First report of chrysophyte stomatocysts from Virginia, USA. Phycologia 50: 511–519. DOI: 10.2216/10-94.1This paper includes data about chrysophyte stomatocysts and algae occurring together with carnivorous plants (Utricularia and Aldrovanda). In the examined material from Fredericksburg Turnpike, Woodford, Virginia, USA, among various groups of algae 12 different morphotypes of chrysophyte stomatocysts were found. Seven of the stomatocysts are reported for the first time from Virginia (stomatocysts 42, 57, 86, 135, 150, 228 and 234). Furthermore, two morphotypes are new to the USA (stomatocysts 142 and 214), and two morphotypes are described as new to science (stomatocysts 2 and 3). The new morphotypes were described on the basis of 11 and five specimens, respectively. All reported morphotypes are briefly described and illustrated using scanning electron microscopy. The list of algal taxa occurring together with stomatocysts and inside the traps of Utricularia purpurea is also presented.

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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.186
Teacher spread0.165 · 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

Citations19
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhycologiaSame topicPlant and Biological Electrophysiology StudiesFrench-language works237,207