Lichens of ultramafic substrates in North America: a review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lichens are among the most prominent and successful life forms of metal-rich habitats, including ultramafic rocks and soils; however, research on lichens of ultramafic habitats is limited, especially on the North American continent. This review examines geographic and ecological patterns of ultramafic lichen assemblages by synthesizing published reports of lichens of ultramafic substrates in North America, and by creating a database characterizing the ecology and habitat (substrate type, pH affinity, geographic distribution) for all taxa recorded in the literature. This effort yielded a total of 437 lichen species and infraspecific taxa reported from ultramafic substrates in the published literature. Lichen assemblages of ultramafic substrates vary in composition and are dominated by acidophytic taxa with a minor, but consistent, basiphytic component. Species lists from ultramafic habitats in different geographic regions varied widely, suggesting that factors unrelated to substrate, such as climate, have a large effect on lichen assemblage composition. However, several studies showed clear differentiation between lichen composition on nearby or adjacent ultramafic and nonultramafic habitats, suggesting that ultramafic substrates harbor regionally unique lichen assemblages.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".