MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3139759764 · doi:10.1093/treephys/tpab035

Plant dormancy research: from environmental control to molecular regulatory networks

2021· article· en· W3139759764 on OpenAlex
Hisayo Yamane, Anil Kumar Singh, Janice E. K. Cooke

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueTree Physiology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Physiology and Cultivation Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDormancyMeristemBiologyPerennial plantApical dominanceBotanyTemperate climatePlant growthChilling requirementAnnual growth cycle of grapevinesBorealGerminationShootEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Annual growth cycles of perennial horticultural and forest woody plant species of temperate and boreal regions can be divided into two phases, namely the growth and dormancy phases. During the dormancy phase, vegetative and reproductive meristems undergo dormancy to withstand subzero winter temperatures. The dormant state of the plant organs can be defined classically as a non-growing latent state, where no visible growth occurs in meristem containing plants structures, such as seeds and buds. In the strictest view of the term, dormancy is considered a state of the meristem in which cell divisions cease, and the meristem is unresponsive to growth-promoting cues until dormancy-breaking cues are perceived by the plant (Rohde and Bhalerao 2007). For more than 30 years, bud dormancy has been distinguished into three types: (i) paradormancy, where growth of the lateral bud is suppressed by actively growing apical bud and is also known as apical...

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.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.970
Threshold uncertainty score0.651

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.204 · 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