Expansion pathways of the exotic common reed (<i>Phragmites australis</i>): a historical and genetic analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Using 779 herbarium and modern specimens, we reconstructed the spread of the common reed ( Phragmites australis ) in Quebec, Canada, where large‐scale invasion of this plant species has been reported since the 1960s. All specimens were genetically differentiated using molecular tools to identify the genotype (native or exotic). The exotic genotype (haplotype M) has been present in Quebec as early as 1916, but it was rare prior to the 1970s and was almost exclusively restricted to the shores of the St. Lawrence River. The exotic genotype spread inland only after the beginning of the 1970s. In less than 20 years, a complete shift occurred, from the dominance of native genotypes to the dominance of the exotic genotype. Today, more than 95% of common reed colonies found in Quebec are dominated by the haplotype M. It is especially abundant along roads, but colonies present in marshes are also dominated by the exotic genotype. This study provides evidence that, in Quebec, the development of the highway network in the 1960s and 1970s strongly contributed to the inland expansion of the exotic genotype. Moreover, it shows the usefulness of molecular techniques for reconstructing the spread of an invader. Without the use of molecular tools, the reconstruction of invasions of exotic taxa would be impossible because of the lack of clear phenotypic differences between genotypes.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".