Biogeographic origins and reproductive mode of naturalised populations of Acacia saligna
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Acacia saligna (Labill.) H.L.Wendl. is a species complex with an extensive history of anthropogenic utilisation and distribution. The taxon is naturalised and invasive in many countries. Extensive morphological variation makes accurate taxonomic identification of populations difficult. We used population genetic analysis to determine the biogeographic origins of 12 naturalised populations sampled from throughout south-eastern South Australia and assess the mode of reproduction (seedling or root suckering) at sites with active recruitment. Ten naturalised populations were assigned to Eastern ‘saligna’, although some also showed a lesser degree of affinity with other entities. A single population was assigned to Western ‘saligna’, but showed some affinity with Eastern ‘saligna’, and one population assigned to subsp. ‘lindleyi’ showed some affinity with Northern ‘lindleyi’. These assignments suggest that although several genetic entities of A. saligna are represented in South Australia, the majority of germplasm has originated from native populations of Eastern ‘saligna’ located around Esperance on Western Australia’s southern coast. Genetic diversity is limited in naturalised A. saligna compared with that present in the native range, suggesting a restricted number of historical introductions. Reproduction is predominantly by seedling recruitment, as opposed to clonal reproduction.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".