Relationship between flower size and leaf size,number of Stellera chamaejasme population of degraded alpine grassland along an altitude gradient
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The relationship between flower size and leaf size and number reflects the plant adaptation strategies in external morphology during the long-term interaction of plants with different environments,and the variation of the relationship reflects plant adaptation to heterogeneous environments. In this study,an investigation was carried out to examine the relationship between flower size and leaf size and number of Stellera chamaejasme along four different altitude gradients in an alpine grassland in the northern slope of Qilian Mountains. The results showed that,with increasing elevation,the height,density,and aboveground biomass of the plant communities displayed a pattern of initial increase and then a decline. The aboveground biomass,plant height and leaf biomass of S. chamaejasme declined gradually,while reproductive allocation,flower size and leaf number both increased gradually. Flower size of S. chamaejasme was significantly positively correlated with leaf number( P 0. 01),but negatively with leaf biomass,while there was no significant correlation between flower size and leaf biomass( P 0. 05). Therefore,habitat had a significant influence on the dependency among size of flower and leaf size and number. The plant size would be decreased by the environmental stress at high altitude,and both flower size and leaf number are increased while the leaf size is declined to ensure the reproductive success of S. chamaejasme.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".