<i>Dupontia</i> (Poaceae) in North America
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Challenged by work on the Panarctic Flora project and apparent discrepancies in recent taxonomic treatments, the genus Dupontia was studied from herbarium specimens, including types and chromosome vouchers, and by numerical taxonomy, mapping the distribution of morphological characteristics, consideration of chromosome numbers, and field work in the Canadian Arctic. Our results using these techniques show random variability in many characters and differences in plant size that appear to be partly habitat related. The treatment of the genus has varied from the recognition of one variable species to three or more distinct species. Morphological characters, used in the literature to divide the genus Dupontia into more than one taxon, cannot be reliably applied to distinguish most North American plants. Continuous morphological variation in combination with high and variable ploidy levels, effective vegetative growth, and rare sexual reproduction suggests the use of a broad species concept. Until further evidence is available, our results support treating the genus as monotypic.Key words: Poaceae, Dupontia, morphology, chromosome numbers, conditional clustering, contingency tables.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".