An assessment of variation in foothills rough fescue [<i>Festuca campestris</i> (Rydb.)] in southern Alberta
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The genetic diversity of native plants is thought to be an important consideration in the selection of appropriate material for reclamation. Field trials were c onducted in southern Alberta to determine the genetic variability, expressed through phenotypic and performance attributes, of several populations of foothills rough fescue [ Festuca campestris (Rydb.)] found in southern Alberta and south-central British Co lumbia. The objectives of this study were to determine the extent of genetic variability among plants of foothills rough fescue. Sixty-four plants from four populations were sampled in 1992, propagated vegetatively to produce clones for replicated trials a nd planted in four locations in 1993. Eleven plant characteristics, including phenotypic and performance variables, were observed from 1994 to 1997. Since the plants were grown in common environments, variations among them were assumed to be caused by gen etic differences. All variables were affected ( P < 0.05) by collection site and, with a few exceptions, test location, year and their two and three-way interactions. The most important factors specific to our objectives were collection site and its interact ions with test location and year. The rough fescue plants expressed differences ( P < 0.05) among populations for all selected traits but displayed considerable overlap in the range of values for all variables both within and among test sites. Therefore, wh ile the populations may be different, individuals within populations have common attributes that suggest sufficient genetic variability to allow successful establishment over a greater range of environmental variability than present at their origins. Resu lts from a secondary test suggest that selection pressure, induced by grazing, resulted in genotypes that were more winter-hardy. However, this observation needs further validation with a more robust test. Key words:
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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".