MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4328001923 · doi:10.58828/nuy00634

The type of <i>Acacia aneura</i> (Mulga) and ambiguities concerning the application of this name

2012· article· en· W4328001923 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Bruce Roger Maslin, Martin C O‘Leary, J E Reid, Joseph T. Miller

Bibliographic record

VenueNuytsia—The journal of the Western Australian Herbarium · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Taxonomy and Phylogenetics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersRio Tinto
KeywordsAcaciaType (biology)FabaceaeBotanyBiologyGeographyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The type of Acacia aneura (Mulga: Fabaceae) and ambiguities concerning the application of this name.Nuytsia 22(4): 269-294 (2012).Acacia aneura F.Muell.ex Benth. is a member of a large, taxonomically complex group of plants that are very common in the Australian arid zone.In order to help determine the application of this name the type collection of A. aneura at the National Herbarium of Victoria (MEL) is reassessed after visits to the type locality.This collection comprises rather fragmentary specimens mounted on three sheets (MEL 724215, 724218 and 724219), each labelled as having been collected [in 1851] by Ferdinand von Mueller from 'Cudnaka'.This locality is now known as Kanyaka, located in the South Flinders Ranges, South Australia, between Quorn and Hawker.The holotype is confirmed as the depauperate fruiting specimen on MEL 724218.The fertile specimen on MEL 724219 is confirmed as belonging to a Mulga taxon of uncertain status and is not a type.The sterile specimen on MEL 724215 and the sterile specimens on MEL 724219 may or may not be types, but their status cannot be determined with any certainty.The populations at Kanyaka that Mueller presumably visited were sampled by the authors in 2007, 2008 and 2010.Subsequent study showed there to be two distinct Mulga morphotypes in these populations.One morphotype corresponds to the type of A. aneura but the status of the second morphotype is uncertain.The latter does not match the fertile specimen on MEL 724219 and appears not to have been collected by Mueller; it may possibly represent a hitherto undescribed species.The taxonomic status of the first morphotype, and hence the application of the name A. aneura, is currently uncertain.Further field, morphological and genetic studies, especially of South Australian populations, are needed to resolve the application of the name A. aneura and also to establish the status of the second morphotype collected from the type locality.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.054
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNuytsia—The journal of the Western Australian HerbariumSame topicPlant Taxonomy and PhylogeneticsFrench-language works237,207