MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386454553 · doi:10.5248/137.629

<i>Lichenomphalia umbellifera</i>: fungible and infungible epithets and species concepts

2023· article· en· W4386454553 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMycotaxon · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicLichen and fungal ecology
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersSan Francisco State UniversityU.S. Department of Agriculture
KeywordsBasionymEpithetBiologySynonym (taxonomy)GenusBotanyTaxonomy (biology)Type speciesZoologyType (biology)NomenclatureEcologyLinguisticsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Comparison of the protologue of Agaricus umbellifer L. with specimens and descriptions of the basidiolichen Lichenomphalia umbellifera (L.) Redhead &amp; al. revealed that the epithet umbellifera was misapplied to the Lichenomphalia species, causing several major conflicts with Linnaeus's species concept. A felicitous match for Linnaeus's species concept was found with a species of Marasmius sect. Epiphylli . Because A. umbellifer falls in a group that arises from an evolutionary pathway divergent from that leading to Marasmius s. str., we erected a new genus, Owingsia , to accommodate it, and recombined the type species as Owingsia umbellifera . Molecular studies demonstrated that it is a widely distributed circumpolar species, prevalent in Lapland and islands of the Baltic Sea, where Linnaeus encountered it. The earliest legitimate description of the basidiolichen L. umbellifera is A. pseudoandrosaceus Bull., a name superseded by the sanctioned later synonym, A. ericetorum Pers. We recombined this basionym as L. ericetorum , and epitypified O. umbellifera and L. ericetorum with modern sequenced specimens.

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.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.492
Threshold uncertainty score0.575

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.206 · 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