MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Taxonomic significance of seed characters and SDS-PAGE analysis in the classification of Ericaceae

2022· article· en· W4285598235 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Lamiaa F. Shalabi, Nagwan Hamdy, Ethar Hussein

Bibliographic record

VenueTaeckholmia/Taeckholmia (Online) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Diversity and Evolution
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of British Columbia
KeywordsEricaceaeBiologyBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Classification of nineteen taxa, belong to ten genera of family Ericaceae are studied. The study based on macro-, micro-morphological characters of seeds and SDS-PAGE analysis techniques. The phenetic relationships of the studied taxa were expressed by UPGMA-clustering method using NTSYS-pc 2.2 software. The UPGMA phenogram based on 47 characters revealed the separation of two major clusters (A) and (B). Group (A) subdivided into two sub ordinary clusters (AC), expressed subfamily Vaccinoideae, and (AD) which expressed together with main group (B) subfamily Ericoideae. The studied genera are distributed equally between these two subfamilies. Vaccinoideae is represented by five tribes: Vaccinieae, Gaultherieae, Oxydendreae, Lyonieae and Andromedeae. Ericoideae is separated as two clades representing two tribes: (AD) Phyllodoceae and (B) Rhodoreae. The produced hierarchical taxonomic arrangement typically matches the traditional classifications of the family. Clustering of Menziesia pilosa with Rhododendron menziesii in near distance with all Rhododendron taxa confirmed the placement of both genera under tribe Rhodoreae, and supports the transfer of genus Menziesia to be nested in Rhododendron as recommended by some recent cladistics analyses of DNA data.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.175 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTaeckholmia/Taeckholmia (Online)Same topicPlant Diversity and EvolutionFrench-language works237,207