MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313620557 · doi:10.1139/cjb-2022-0096

First report of female gametangia in the invasive macroalga starry stonewort (<i>Nitellopsis obtusa</i>) in North America

2023· article· en· W4313620557 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Tyler J. Harrow‐Lyle, Brian K. Ginn, Andrea E. Kirkwood, Stephanie Melles

Bibliographic record

VenueBotany · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBryophyte Studies and Records
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech UniversityLake Simcoe Region Conservation AuthorityToronto Metropolitan University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBiologyBotanyContext (archaeology)AntheridiumEcologySporangium

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nitellopsis obtusa (Desv.) J. Groves (starry stonewort) is a macroalga in the Characeae family first documented in North America c. 1974. Since initial introduction, N. obtusa clonal populations quickly established in inland lakes as early as 2005. Despite increased N. obtusa monitoring over the last decade, only sterile or male specimens were documented in North America; however, during routine monitoring in Lake Simcoe and Lake Scugog in 2022, we discovered the presence of female gametangia on N. obtusa. In addition, two other Characeae genera had prevalent antheridia and oogonia, co-occurring with oogonia-presenting N. obtusa, which had not been observed previously despite intensive monitoring since 2008. Further studies in North America are required to confirm the proportion of female populations present within invaded regions, as well as to identify plausible causes shifting gametangia development across non-native and native Characeae, especially within the context of climate change. The presence of oogonia on N. obtusa represents a major change to our understanding of this species and its reproductive ecology in North America.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.099
Threshold uncertainty score0.915

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.225
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

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 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBotanySame topicBryophyte Studies and RecordsFrench-language works237,207