MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2419577384 · doi:10.26786/1920-7603(2016)13

Assessment of pollen assemblages from the hives of <i>Tetragonula carbonaria</i> for the presence of the threatened species <i>Grevillea parviflora</i> subsp. <i>parviflora</i>

2016· article· en· W2419577384 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Danielle Lloyd-Prichard, Steven Lucas, Tim K. Roberts, Simon Haberle

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pollination Ecology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyPollenInflorescenceStingless beeBotanyThreatened speciesHorticultureEcologyHymenopteraHabitatApidae

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pollen assemblages from managed hives of the Australian social stingless bee Tetragonula carbonaria were examined for the presence of the threatened species Grevillea parviflora subsp. Parviflora. Managed hives of Tetragonula carbonaria were placed in bushland at Lake Macquarie, New South Wales, Australia, in four known populations of Grevillea parviflora subsp. parviflora through the main flowering period of 12 September to 2 November 2014. Samples of honey and propolis were collected from the hives at the end of this period and analysed using palynology techniques for the presence of Grevillea parviflora subsp. parviflora pollen. Grevillea parviflora subsp. parviflora pollen was detected in all propolis samples from the four study sites but was not found in the honey samples. Field observations identified that honeybees were the dominant insect visitor to Grevillea parviflora subsp. parviflora at all sites. There were no sightings of Tetragonula carbonaria foraging on Grevillea parviflora subsp. parviflora inflorescences during field observations. This study also demonstrates the application of managed hives of the Australian stingless bees Tetragonula carbonaria for monitoring floral diversity where propolis samples can be used to indicate plant species richness (biodiversity) and the presence of specific species relevant to conservation within their foraging area.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.929
Threshold uncertainty score0.947

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.001
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pollination EcologySame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207