MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Serpentine Plant Life of Western North America

2007· book-chapter· en· W3100117420 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Earl B. Alexander, Roger G. Coleman, Todd Keeler-Wolfe, Susan Harrison

Bibliographic record

VenueOxford University Press eBooks · 2007
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBotany, Ecology, and Taxonomy Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTsugaVegetation (pathology)GeographyPinus contortaEcologyForbPlant communitySpecies richnessForestryBiologyGrassland

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Serpentine plant life varies dramatically across western North America from north to south and, to a lesser extent, from the coast inland. At the latitudinal extremes in Alaska and Baja California, it follows patterns seen in other climatically harsh parts of the world (as discussed in chapter 10), but the species composition is not very distinctive and there are few endemics. In between, in Washington, Oregon, and especially in the California Floristic Province, lies a great diversity of distinctive serpentine vegetation types and endemic species. This chapter outlines the coarse patterns of variation in vegetation structure and endemic species richness across this region, as a prelude to chapter 12, which describes specific serpentine vegetation types in detail. Little has been published about the serpentine vegetation of Alaska and the Yukon. The Serpentine Slide Research Natural Area in central Alaska was described by Juday (1992) as having a mixture of white spruce (Picea glauca) and paper birch (Betula papyrifera) with Rosa acicularis, Juniperus communis, and Vaccinium uliginosum in the understory. Several herbs are shared with Swedish serpentines (e.g., Campanula rotundifolia, Minuartia rubella, Rumex acetosa, Saxifraga oppositifolia, Silene acaulis); several others showed northern range extensions on serpentine (see chapter 9). The ultramafic vegetation of Golden Mountain in southeast Alaska was described by Alexander et al. (1989) as alpine meadow containing forbs, graminoids, and low shrubs, with a transition through low shrubs and stunted lodgepole pines (Pinus contorta) down to spruce (Picea sitchensis)–hemlock (mainly Tsuga mertensiana) forest, with shrubs and some cedar (Chamaecyparis nootkatensis). The forest to alpine transition was lower on serpentine than on other soils. No serpentine endemic species are known from this region. From south–central British Columbia to central Oregon, serpentine has been described by Kruckeberg (1969, 1992) as supporting open stands of various conifers, which are either a subset of the species occurring in adjacent denser forests on other soils or represent elevational or geographic range shifts. Understories are sparse and may include graminoids, perennial forbs, and shrubs. On rocky ridgetops and at higher elevations and latitudes, these conifer plant communities give way gradually to alpine tundra.

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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.092

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 communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.194
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 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
GenreOther

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

Citations1
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOxford University Press eBooksSame topicBotany, Ecology, and Taxonomy StudiesFrench-language works237,207