MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Adaptation and the Geographic Spread of Crop Species

2023· review· en· W4389068861 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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnual Review of Plant Biology · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic diversity and population structure
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersYork UniversityZegar Family FoundationNew York University Abu DhabiNational Science Foundation
KeywordsBiological dispersalDomesticationAdaptation (eye)MesoamericaGeographyCropAgricultureBiologyEcologyAgroforestryArchaeologyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Crops are plant species that were domesticated starting about 11,000 years ago from several centers of origin, most prominently the Fertile Crescent, East Asia, and Mesoamerica. From their domestication centers, these crops spread across the globe and had to adapt to differing environments as a result of this dispersal. We discuss broad patterns of crop spread, including the early diffusion of crops associated with the rise and spread of agriculture, the later movement via ancient trading networks, and the exchange between the Old and New Worlds over the last ∼550 years after the European colonization of the Americas. We also examine the various genetic mechanisms associated with the evolutionary adaptation of crops to their new environments after dispersal, most prominently seasonal adaptation associated with movement across latitudes, as well as altitudinal, temperature, and other environmental factors.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.982
Threshold uncertainty score0.431

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.259 · 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