MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2473263436 · doi:10.14288/1.0096690

Morphological variation in a biotically patchy environment : evidence from a pasture population of Trifolium repens l.

2010· article· en· W2473263436 on OpenAlexaff
Richard C. Evans

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBotany and Plant Ecology Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrifolium repensPastureBiologyPopulationVariation (astronomy)AgronomyGeographyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The relationship between morphological variability and biotic environmental heterogeneity was studied in a pasture population of Trifolium repens. It had been argued that the unexpectedly high levels of variation in T. repens could be maintained by diversifying selection. The mosaic of neighbours (perennial grasses) with which T. repens coexists constitutes a prominent element of biotic patchiness that may lead to sorting among T. repens genotypes on the basis of neighbour-specific compatibilities. A variation study was conducted on a set of 400 individuals of T. repens collected on a neighbour-specific basis from a 43 year old pasture and grown for one season under common garden conditions. A significant proportion of the variation in a set of twelve morphological characters was accounted for by the neighbour with which the individual of T. repens had been growing in the field. The actual amount of variation accounted for, however, was low (6-19%). It was concluded that although diversifying selection could be operating in the pasture, it is not of primary importance in the maintenance of variation in this population. A repeat study was carried out after the plants had spent two years in the common garden. None of the earlier among-neighbour differences in morphology were retained. I concluded that the original results reflected developmental differences carried over from the pasture.

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 score0.503
Threshold uncertainty score0.828

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.157
Teacher spread0.147 · 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

Citations3
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)Same topicBotany and Plant Ecology StudiesFrench-language works237,207