MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2155311349 · doi:10.1139/b07-066

Genetic structure of rheophytic and nonrheophytic populations of <i>Farfugium japonicum</i> on Yaeyama Islands, Japan

2007· article· en· W2155311349 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Naofumi Nomura, Hiroaki Setoguchi, Keiko Yasuda, Tokushiro Takaso

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Botany · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine and coastal plant biology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRiparian zoneHabitatBiologyGene flowPopulationFacultativeRange (aeronautics)EcologyBotanyGenetic variationGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Farfugium japonicum (L.f.) Kitam., a facultative rheophyte occupying both dryland and riparian habitats within the species range, exhibits various shapes of leaves ranging from stenophyllous to round. The present study assesses variability in leaf morphology (five leaf characters) and genetics (305 AFLP markers) for populations from dryland and riparian habitats on Yaeyama Islands, Japan. Results from the two datasets produced somewhat different patterns indicating that selection for habitat type is effective on leaf shape attributes, while lack of differentiation was observed for neutral markers caused by extensive gene flow. Leaf-shape attributes were clustered into three groups: shade (round), sun (round), and narrow (stenophyllous) leaves. Narrow leaves were only found in riparian populations, indicating that flood intensity acts as a selective agent for this attribute. Although high within-population variation was demonstrated by AMOVA, the populations were distinct enough to be classified in separate groups irrespective of habitat type. However, Nei’s genetic diversity index (H) was low; suggesting lack of barriers to gene flow among individuals and selection for narrow leaves may act on the survivorship of young seedling.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.184 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations4
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of BotanySame topicMarine and coastal plant biologyFrench-language works237,207