MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2607254581 · doi:10.1002/rra.3149

Giant hogweed at its northern distribution limit in North America: Experiments for a better understanding of its dispersal dynamics along rivers

2017· article· en· W2607254581 on OpenAlexafffundabout
N. Trottier, Elisabeth Groeneveld, Claude Lavoie

Bibliographic record

VenueRiver Research and Applications · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBiological dispersalEcologyRiparian zoneHabitatSeed dispersalPopulationBiologyEnvironmental science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We studied the reproduction and dispersal of giant hogweed ( Heracleum mantegazzianum ) at its northern distribution limit in North America (Québec, 2014–2016) to better understand the invasion dynamics of the species along rivers. Seeds were collected from a riparian population to conduct germination, floatation, and dispersal experiments. Data were analysed in comparison with a real invasion case that was initiated about 10 years ago along a river system. In Québec, giant hogweed individuals produce on average 14,000 to 16,000 seeds with a germination rate of 75–85%. Seeds with endosperm that fall in water likely sink within 5 hr. Along a small brook, most disperse over short distances (<40 m) in summer, although some can travel 100–300 m. These data suggest that late‐summer or early‐fall water dispersal of seeds would not explain the magnitude and rapidity of the invasion patterns observed along streams. We suggest that late‐fall and, especially, spring floods are the most efficient dispersal vectors for giant hogweed seeds and are likely responsible for the establishment of populations kilometres downstream from introduction points along river systems. The spread of giant hogweed would consequently be less influenced in the near future by a rise in temperature than by a change in the magnitude or timing of flood events.

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 score0.113
Threshold uncertainty score0.953

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 studies0.0010.000
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 head0.174
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.153 · 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

Citations17
Published2017
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRiver Research and ApplicationsSame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207