MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2262893100 · doi:10.1139/cjes-2015-0190

Biotic processes in the Okanagan Highlands floras: possible evidence of hybridization in plants adapting to a temperate forest

2016· article· en· W2262893100 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Melanie L. DeVore, Kathleen B. Pigg

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Earth Sciences · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBotanical Studies and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersArizona State University
KeywordsAnacardiaceaeFlora (microbiology)TaxonBiologyEcologyRosaceaeTemperate climateBotanyPlant evolutionPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hybridization is a key mechanism for increased diversification and speciation among modern plants and is especially important in certain families such as Rosaceae and Anacardiaceae. This mechanism is found to occur most commonly in areas of ecological disturbance, distribution, and migration. Resulting hybrid individuals have characteristic intermediate or mosaic patterns that combine those of the two parents in morphologically distinct and identifiable ways. The diverse latest Early Eocene flora of Republic, Washington, USA, is among the most collected of the Okanagan Highlands floras. This fossil flora includes relatives of modern taxa that are known to hybridize and produce characteristic patterns of leaf morphology and venation (Rosaceae; Anacardiaceae). In this study, we document patterns found in representative fossil leaves that are comparable to those indicative of hybridization in the modern relatives. We use the genera Sorbus L. (Rosaceae) and Rhus L. (Anacardiaceae) as models to demonstrate potential hybridization in the latest Early Eocene.

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 score0.969
Threshold uncertainty score0.062

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 studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.195 · 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

Citations9
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Earth SciencesSame topicBotanical Studies and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207