MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393139449 · doi:10.1186/s13002-024-00681-0

A review of the melliferous flora of Yucatan peninsula, Mexico, on the basis for the honey production cycle

2024· review· en· W4393139449 on OpenAlexaff
Donají Zúñiga-Díaz, William Cetzal‐Ix, Héctor M. J. López-Castilla, Eliana Noguera‐Savelli, Iván Tamayo‐Cen, Jesús Froylán Martínez-Puc, Saikat Basu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicScarabaeidae Beetle Taxonomy and Biogeography
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBeekeepingHerbariumGeographyPeninsulaFlora (microbiology)EcologyTaxonBiodiversityYucatan peninsulaBiologyAgroforestry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The Yucatan Peninsula (YP) is one of the most important regions in global apiculture. Hence, this work reviews and integrates the knowledge of the species diversity, growth habits, ecosystems, floral calendars during the apiculture production cycles and the types of vegetation represented in the melliferous flora (MF) of the YP; as a basis for proposing selection strategies locating suitable apiculture production areas for local beekeepers and help in the economic development of the region. METHODS: A comprehensive review of the MF literature was carried out using the snowball method to determine and update the number of species useful for apiculture. The growth habits and flower calendars were determined through a review of the literature and databases of specimens from the herbaria CICY, UCAM and MEXU. RESULTS: The YP reports a total of 935 taxa of MF (98 families and 498 genera); of these, Campeche has 812 taxa, followed by Quintana Roo (786) and Yucatán (767). The MF is made up of herbs (282), followed by shrubs (260), trees (229), climbers (82), woody climbers (67) palms (14) and parasitic plant (1). CONCLUSION: Of the 935 species of MF registered at the regional level, a high number of species have flowering throughout the year, however, not all of these species are considered useful for local commercial apiculture. Only a select group of 23 species are considered of major importance for local apiculture industry.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0070.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.247 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations10
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Ethnobiology and EthnomedicineSame topicScarabaeidae Beetle Taxonomy and BiogeographyFrench-language works237,207