<i>Picea</i> × <i>darwyniana</i> Björk & Goward: an invalid taxonomic name
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Picea × darwyniana Björk & Goward was recently proposed to replace Picea albertiana S. Brown as the representative taxon for the hybrid offspring of Picea glauca (Moench) Voss and Picea engelmannii Parry ex Engelm., but should be considered invalid for three reasons. First, the proponents failed to document in any way that the P. albertiana isotypes were Picea glauca × mariana Little & Pauley hybrids, as they claimed. Secondly, the P. albertiana isotypes lacked pubescent twigs, purple markings on their seed cones, and denticulate cone-scale margins, which are characteristics of P. glauca × mariana. This indicates a misinterpretation of the P. albertiana parentage. Lastly, P. × darwyniana appears to be an example of P. albertiana ssp. ogilviei Strong & Hills. As the latter is an earlier and validly published name, P. × darwyniana is an illegitimate replacement for plants within the P. glauca × engelmannii (= P.a. ssp. albertiana) and P. engelmannii × glauca (= P.a. ssp. ogilviei) circumscriptions based on naming priority.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
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".