MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2130780043 · doi:10.1139/b02-011

Reflections on lichenology: achievements over the last 40 years and challenges for the future

2002· article· en· W2130780043 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
D. H. S. Richardson

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Botany · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicLichen and fungal ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBritish Antarctic SurveyBritish Lichen Society
KeywordsLichenMedalPleaValue (mathematics)EcologyEnvironmental ethicsLibrary scienceHistoryBiologyPolitical scienceArchaeologyPhilosophyLawComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In June 2000, at the joint meeting of the Canadian Botanical Association and the Canadian Society of Plant Physiologists, the author of this review was presented with the George Lawson Medal for lifelong contributions to botany and was invited to prepare a special contribution for the Canadian Journal of Botany. Subsequently, an invitation was received to give the Swinscow Lecture to the British Lichen Society and the Linnean Society in London. This commentary is a written version of that January 2001 lecture and presents a personalized view of developments in those areas of lichenology studied by the author during a career in Canada and other parts of the world. Aspects touched upon include lichen identification, spore dispersal, nutrient transfer between the symbionts, water relations, and lichen strategies in particular climatic regions. The value of lichens for monitoring pollutants is noted, and the developing problem of lichen conservation is discussed. Finally, a plea is made regarding the value of field teaching and field excursions with respect to recruiting the next generation of lichenologists.Key words: lichens, asci, carbohydrate transfer, ecophysiology, pollution, old-growth forests, lichen societies.

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: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.870
Threshold uncertainty score0.876

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 designOther design
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

Citations17
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of BotanySame topicLichen and fungal ecologyFrench-language works237,207