MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2782177193 · doi:10.11646/phytotaxa.333.1.1

Sphagnum incundum a new species in Sphagnum subg. Acutifolia (Sphagnaceae) from boreal and arctic regions of North America

2018· article· en· W2782177193 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Magni Olsen Kyrkjeeide, Kristian Hassel, Blanka Shaw, A. Jonathan Shaw, Eva M. Temsch, Kjell Ivar Flatberg

Bibliographic record

VenuePhytotaxa · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBryophyte Studies and Records
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSphagnumBiologyArcticSubgenusBorealBotanyTaigaEcologyTaxonomy (biology)Peat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We describe Sphagnum incundum in Sphagnum subgenus Acutifolia (Sphagnaceae, Bryophyta). We used both molecular and morphological methods to describe the new species. Molecular relationships with closely related species were explored based on microsatellites and nuclear and plastid DNA sequences. The morphological description is based on qualitative examination of morphological characters and measurements of leaves and hyalocysts. Morphological characters are compared between closely related species. The results from Feulgen densitometry and microsatellite analysis show that S. incundum is gametophytically haploid. Molecular analyses show that it is a close relative to S. flavicomans, S. subfulvum and S. subnitens, but differs both genetically and in morphological key characters, justifying the description of S. incundum as a new species. The new peatmoss is found in North America along the western coast of Greenland, in Canada from Quebec and Northwest Territories, and Alaska (United States). The new species has a boreal to arctic distribution.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.995
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.194 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations12
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhytotaxaSame topicBryophyte Studies and RecordsFrench-language works237,207