The Biology of Canadian Weeds. 146.<i>Rhododendron groenlandicum</i>(Oeder) Kron and Judd
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hébert, F. and Thiffault, N. 2011. The Biology of Canadian Weeds. 146. Rhododendron groenlandicum (Oeder) Kron and Judd. Can. J. Plant Sci. 91: 725–738. Rhododendron groenlandicum (Oeder) Kron and Judd, bog Labrador tea, is an evergreen shrub from the Ericacae family native to North America. Bog Labrador tea is associated with the later stages of forest successions in black spruce forest stands of the boreal ecosystems with cool climates, but responds aggressively to forest openings where it is already present. In general, bog Labrador tea is associated with nutrient-poor, acidic soils, with drainage ranging from moist to wet. Layering is the main regeneration strategy of the species; evidence suggests that this could be especially true following disturbances that open the forest canopy. Sexual reproduction maintains viability in undisturbed communities through wind or water dispersal. Rhododendron groenlandicum acclimates more rapidly relative to black spruce after perturbations through a higher rate of resource utilization when resources are available. The species is a highly competitive shrub for soil nutrients; it competes with regenerating conifers for soil nitrogen and phosphorus. It can also assimilate organic nitrogen from the soil through its mycorhizae. These characteristics may lead to the formation of ericaceous heaths that can stay unforested indefinitely. However, this species can be eradicated by herbicides (glyphosate) and heavy site scarification can limit its propagation.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".