MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2298603446 · doi:10.15273/pnsis.v46i2.4058

LATE BLOOMING OF PLANTS FROM NORTHERN NOVA SCOTIA: RESPONSES TO A MILD FALL AND WINTER

2011· article· en· W2298603446 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
David J. Garbary, Jonathan Ferrier, Barry R. Taylor

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Nova Scotian Institute of Science · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBotany, Ecology, and Taxonomy Studies
Canadian institutionsSt. Francis Xavier University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPhenologyNova scotiaHerbaceous plantBiologyBotanyGeographyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Over 1400 flowering records of 135 species were recorded from over 125visits to more than 20 sites in Antigonish County, Nova Scotia from November2005 to January 2006, when the growing season is normally over. The speciesidentified were primarily herbaceous dicots; however, there were four speciesof woody plants (Cornus sericea, Spiraea latifolia, Symphoricarpos albusand Salix sp.) and one monocot (Allium schoenoprasum). The number ofspecies flowering declined linearly as fall progressed, as did the amountof flowering for each species. Nevertheless, over 40 species were still inflower in early December, and over 20 species flowered in January. Thefinal flowering date was 21 January, when ten species were found. Thiswork builds on a previous study in 2001, when 93 species were recordedin flower during November-December. In addition to the 30% increase inrecorded species in 2005, almost 50% of the species found in 2005 werenot recorded in 2001. This study provides an expanded baseline againstwhich changes in flowering phenology can be evaluated with respect tosubsequent regional climate change.Key Words: Antigonish, flowering, Nova Scotia, phenology, climate change

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 score0.266
Threshold uncertainty score0.929

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.175 · 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

Citations4
Published2011
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Nova Scotian Institute of ScienceSame topicBotany, Ecology, and Taxonomy StudiesFrench-language works237,207