MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2177998065 · doi:10.1086/317914

Diversity among Taxodioid Conifers: <i>Metasequoia foxii</i> sp. nov. from the Paleocene of Central Alberta, Canada

2001· article· en· W2177998065 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Ruth A. Stockey, Gar W. Rothwell, Amy B. Falder

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Plant Sciences · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Diversity and Evolution
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersDivision of Environmental BiologyNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Alberta
KeywordsBiologyBotanyPollenSporophyteGenus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A single species of taxodioid conifers is among the dominant floristic elements at two stratigraphically contemporaneous Paleocene fossil localities in central Alberta, Canada. More than 10,000 compression specimens, including oppositely branched stems, vegetative shoots with decussately arranged leaves, pollen cones, pollen, ovulate cones, seeds, and seedlings, provide data for reconstructing a new species of Metasequoia. An in situ permineralized stem provides information about wood structure and suggests that the plant was a canopy tree. As is characteristic of taxodioid conifers in general, most compressed organs of the new species are not specifically diagnostic when evaluated as isolated fragments of the sporophyte. However, a combination of characters from several organs demonstrates the occurrence of a distinct species, M. foxii sp. nov. The diagnostic combination of characters for this species includes leaf size, pollen cone length, ovuliferous cone scale arrangement, seed size and shape, and characters of the seedlings. Ranges of variation in characters of the new species are compared to those of the currently recognized, well‐known species of Metasequoia, M. glyptostroboides, M. occidentalis, and M. milleri, and evolutionary diversification within the genus is considered.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.170
Threshold uncertainty score0.372

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.183
Teacher spread0.156 · 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 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

Citations44
Published2001
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Plant SciencesSame topicPlant Diversity and EvolutionFrench-language works237,207