Flowering and fruiting responses to climate change of two Arctic plant species, purple saxifrage (<i>Saxifraga oppositifolia</i>) and mountain avens (<i>Dryas integrifolia</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In temperate regions, there are clear indications that spring flowering plants are flowering earlier due to rising temperatures of contemporary climate change. Temperatures in temperate regions are rising predominantly in spring. However, Arctic regions are seeing unprecedented temperature increases, predominantly towards the end of the growing season. We might, therefore, expect to see earlier flowering of later-season flowering Arctic plants. Parks Canada has been monitoring purple saxifrage (Saxifraga oppositifolia) and mountain avens (Dryas integrifolia) flowering and fruiting times for 20 years at Tanquary Fiord, Quttinirpaaq National Park, Ellesmere Island. Saxifraga oppositifolia flowers in early spring, while D. integrifolia flowers in midsummer. Over the 20-year period, Tanquary Fiord's annual and late-summer temperatures have risen significantly. During the same timeframe, D. integrifolia showed a trend towards earlier flowering and fruiting, but S. oppositifolia showed no changes in flowering or fruiting time. Flowering time was related to monthly temperatures just prior to flowering. The number of flowers produced was related to the previous autumn's monthly temperatures. We found no relationship between flowering time and snowmelt date. Our findings suggest that Arctic community level ecological effects from climate change induced phenology changes will differ from those in temperate regions.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 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".