Clarifications regarding Noël Necker’s names associated to <i>Chaptalia</i> (Asteraceae: Mutisieae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT The generic name Chaptalia was founded by Ventenant in 1802. In 1891 Kuntze transferred 19 species from Chaptalia to Thyrsanthema , a name established by Necker in 1790, on the basis that Thyrsanthema had priority over the name Chaptalia . The monomial system of nomenclature used by Necker in his Elementa Botanica published in 1790, together with a confusing typification on the basis of Linnean species, led to different interpretations of Necker’s changes by botanists. In 1905 the Vienna Code considered Chaptalia as a nomen conservandum and Thyrsanthema as a nomen rejiciendum . In 1959, the Montreal Code established that the ‘species naturales’ of Necker are not to be treated as generic names. As a consequence, the name Chaptalia was considered a case of superfluous conservation, because Kuntze did not validate Thyrsanthema until 1891. Edward Greene in 1906 added another point of controversy establishing that the names Chaptalia and Thyrsanthema referred to totally different taxa. The nomenclatural history of Chaptalia and allied names described by Necker ( Atasites , Petasites , Thyrsanthema and Tussilago ) is reviewed, and the current status of these names is presented.
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 | 0.009 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".