MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387532836 · doi:10.5091/plecevo.108024

Novelties in the genus Acalypha (Euphorbiaceae, Acalyphoideae): two new species from northern Madagascar

2023· article· en· W4387532836 on OpenAlexaff
Iris Montero‐Muñoz, Geoffrey A. Levin, Concepción Vaquero Lorenzo, Laura González, José María Cardiel

Bibliographic record

VenuePlant Ecology and Evolution · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Diversity and Evolution
Canadian institutionsCanadian Museum of Nature
FundersEuropean CommissionAgencia Estatal de InvestigaciónEuropean Molecular Biology Organization
KeywordsHerbariumIUCN Red ListEuphorbiaceaeConservation statusBiologyTaxonomy (biology)GenusIUCN protected area categoriesEndemismGeographyBotanyEcologyHabitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background and aims – Taxonomic knowledge of Acalypha in the Western Indian Ocean Region (WIOR; including Madagascar, Comoros, Mascarenes, Seychelles, and the Scattered Islands) has increased greatly in the last few years. This paper is the latest in a series of publications that have contributed to create a robust taxonomic framework for Acalypha in this region. Material and methods – The descriptions and illustrations of the new species are based on herbarium specimens and on some field images. Descriptions were made following standard procedures. Maps was prepared using QGIS software and preliminary conservation assessments was made following IUCN guidelines and criteria. Key results – Two species of Acalypha from northern Madagascar are described as new to science: Acalypha bardotiana sp. nov., found on the Montagne des Français (Diana region), and Acalypha inaequibracteata sp. nov., found in the Binara forest (Sava region). Line drawings, field images, distribution maps, and a discussion of their morphological and phylogenetic affinities, as well as the preliminary conservation assessments are provided.

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 score0.115
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.167 · 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlant Ecology and EvolutionSame topicPlant Diversity and EvolutionFrench-language works237,207