MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200529696 · doi:10.1002/cbdv.202100871

Chemical Composition of the Unexplored Volatile Fraction of <i>Betula glandulosa</i>, a Prevalent Shrub in Nunavik, Québec

2021· article· en· W4200529696 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Jean‐Christophe Séguin, Xavier Fernàndez, Stéphane Boudreau, Normand Voyer

Bibliographic record

VenueChemistry & Biodiversity · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsPROTEOUniversité LavalCenter for Northern Studies
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaAgence Nationale de la Recherche
KeywordsChemistrySubarctic climateShrubLinaloolComposition (language)BotanyEcosystemEugenolBetula pubescensEcologyFood scienceEssential oilBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The volatile fraction of the leaves of Betula glandulosa Michx . has been investigated for its secondary metabolite composition by GC/MS and GC/FID. The rapid expansion of this shrub species in subarctic landscapes, like the ones found in Nunavik (Northern Québec, Canada), highly impacts ecosystem dynamics. Yet, despite its abundance, few phytochemical investigations have yet been conducted on this species. In this study, we present the first phytochemical investigation of the volatile metabolites of B. glandulosa leaves. Although no essential oil was isolated, volatile compounds were extracted from the hydrosol by steam distillation. The main metabolites observed were linalool (14.6–19.0 %), C 6 oxylipins (known as green leaf volatiles, GLV; total of 18.2–40.2 %), eugenol (1.6–8.6 %) and α ‐terpineol (3.3–4.8 %). Dwarf birch is an important food source for insects and herbivores, so knowledge of its metabolite composition could help understand parts of its functional role in subarctic ecosystems. The composition of the volatile fraction could serve as marker for differentiating B. glandulosa from other dwarf birch species like Betula nana L.

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 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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.194
Threshold uncertainty score0.980

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.180
Teacher spread0.174 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemistry & BiodiversitySame topicFire effects on ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207