LATE BLOOMING OF PLANTS FROM NORTHERN NOVA SCOTIA: RESPONSES TO A MILD FALL AND WINTER
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 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 | 0.001 | 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".