MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Effects of salinity and temperature on <i>ex situ</i> germination of the threatened Gulf of St. Lawrence Aster, <i>Symphyotrichum laurentianum</i> Fernald (Nesom)

2011· article· en· W2127472862 on OpenAlexaffabout
Stephen B. Heard, Justin Ancheta

Bibliographic record

VenuePlant Species Biology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGerminationSalinityHalophyteThreatened speciesBiologyMicrositeHorticultureBotanyAgronomyEcologySeedlingHabitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The threatened Gulf of St. Lawrence Aster, Symphyotrichum laurentianum Fernald (Nesom), is an annual coastal halophyte of the southern Gulf of St. Lawrence, Canada. We examined the effects of salinity (0–20 g/L) and temperature (16–30°C) on germination of S. laurentianum seeds over 32 days. The time‐course of germination was significantly affected by both salinity and temperature. At lower temperatures (16°C and 23°C), germination was inhibited by salt water at days 16 and 32. However, at 30°C germination rates after 16 days were highest at an intermediate salinity, whereas after 32 days germination was uniformly high in all salinity treatments. Overall, the effect of temperature on germination was much stronger than the effect of salinity. Delays in germination resulting from exposure to salinity or from low soil temperatures could set up strong size asymmetries between seedlings of S. laurentianum and the surrounding vegetation, leading to suppression of growing seedlings via shading. Because germination has the potential to be a significant population bottleneck for this seed‐dependent annual, conservation efforts should consider microsite suitability for germination in the management of natural populations and in the selection of sites for explants.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.218
Threshold uncertainty score0.277

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations10
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlant Species BiologySame topicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics StudiesFrench-language works237,207