MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3088094240 · doi:10.7202/1071605ar

Analyse spatio-temporelle des lichens comme bio-indicateurs de la qualité de l’air dans la région de Québec : 1985-1986 à 2016

2020· article· fr· W3088094240 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Gérard Denis, Catherine Bergeron, Romy Jacob-Racine, Michaël A. Leblanc, Claude Lavoie

Bibliographic record

VenueLe Naturaliste canadien · 2020
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicLichen and fungal ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForestryGeographyHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Les lichens, très sensibles à la pollution de l’air, sont souvent absents des quartiers centraux des grandes agglomérations urbaines (déserts lichéniques). Nous avons comparé le couvert d’espèces de lichens corticoles sur des arbres inventoriés dans 105 stations d’échantillonnage dans la ville de Québec en 1985 et 1986 à celui recensé aux mêmes endroits en 2016. Le couvert lichénique total a augmenté dans 80 % des stations revisitées en 2016, avec une hausse moyenne de 86 %, toutes espèces et toutes stations confondues. Candelaria concolor est l’espèce de lichen dont le couvert a connu la plus forte hausse (+91 %), alors que les 3 espèces les plus sensibles à la pollution (Evernia mesomorpha, Flavoparmelia caperata et Punctelia rudecta) sont celles avec les moins fortes hausses. On a néanmoins détecté la présence de F. caperata dans bien plus de stations en 2016 (34) qu’en 1985 et 1986 (21), y compris dans les quartiers centraux. Le désert lichénique observé dans les quartiers centraux de Québec en 1985 et 1986 a totalement disparu en 2016. L’augmentation du couvert lichénique à Québec est cohérente avec la diminution notable des niveaux de dioxyde de soufre enregistrés dans la ville depuis le début des années 1990.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLe Naturaliste canadienSame topicLichen and fungal ecologyFrench-language works237,207