MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2283778935 · doi:10.3732/ajb.1500313

Project Baseline: An unprecedented resource to study plant evolution across space and time

2016· article· en· W2283778935 on OpenAlexaff
Julie R. Etterson, Steven J. Franks, Susan J. Mazer, Ruth G. Shaw, Nicole L. Soper Gorden, Heather E. Schneider, Jennifer J. Weber, Katharine J. Winkler, Arthur E. Weis

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Botany · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic diversity and population structure
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersU.S. Department of EnergyNational Park ServiceUniversity of California, Santa BarbaraU.S. Forest ServiceNational Science Foundation
KeywordsBiologyBaseline (sea)MicroevolutionResource (disambiguation)Range (aeronautics)PopulationEvolutionary biologyEcologyDemographyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PREMISE OF THE STUDY: Project Baseline is a seed bank that offers an unprecedented opportunity to examine spatial and temporal dimensions of microevolution during an era of rapid environmental change. Over the upcoming 50 years, biologists will withdraw genetically representative samples of past populations from this time capsule of seeds and grow them contemporaneously with modern samples to detect any phenotypic and molecular evolution that has occurred during the intervening time. METHODS: We carefully developed this living genome bank using protocols to enhance its experimental value by collecting from multiple populations and species across a broad geographical range in sites that are likely to be preserved into the future. Seeds are accessioned with site and population data and are stored by maternal line under conditions that maximize seed longevity. This open-access resource will be available to researchers at regular intervals to evaluate contemporary evolution. KEY RESULTS: To date, the Project Baseline collection includes 100-200 maternal lines of each of 61 species collected from over 831 populations on sites that are likely to be preserved into the future across the United States (∼78,000 maternal lines). Our strategically designed collection circumvents some problems that can cloud the results of "resurrection" studies involving naturally preserved or existing seed collections that are available fortuitously. CONCLUSIONS: The resurrection approach can be coupled with long-established and newer techniques over the next five decades to elucidate genetic change and thereby vastly improve our understanding of temporal and spatial changes in phenotype and the evolutionary processes underlying it.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.006

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Citations78
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of BotanySame topicGenetic diversity and population structureFrench-language works237,207