MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413471929 · doi:10.1139/as-2025-0006

Reassessing adaptational lag in <i>Eriophorum vaginatum</i>: short-term responses to reciprocal transplant and passive warming experiments in northern Alaska

2025· article· en· W4413471929 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jennifer L. Chandler, James B. McGraw, Michael L. Moody, Jianwu Tang, Janice Voltzow, Ned Fetcher

Bibliographic record

VenueArctic Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBotany, Ecology, and Taxonomy Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsReciprocalTerm (time)LagEnvironmental scienceComputer sciencePhysicsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Previous Eriophorum vaginatum L. studies have detected adaptational lag in response to climate change. We revisited this concept through a short-term reciprocal transplant experiment combined with warming via open-top chambers (OTCs). We asked: (1) if population growth rates of different ecotypes responded differently to reciprocal transplant, (2) if home-site advantage existed, and (3) if an interaction of ecotype, transplant garden, and OTC treatment existed. We established three transplant gardens, two north of the Brooks Range (Toolik and Sagwon) and one south (Coldfoot); OTCs were deployed in northern gardens. We censused tillers in 2016 and 2017. Lefkovitch matrices were jackknifed using Yellow Taxi Analysis to quantify each tiller's contribution to population growth rate, which were incorporated into nested ANOVAs. Of tussocks grown in ambient temperature, mean tiller population growth from different source ecotypes did not respond differently to transplant. Home site advantage was not observed among tillers not exposed to warming via OTC, which may indicate adaptational lag is occurring. Mean population growth rate of OTC-exposed tillers was higher at Toolik than Sagwon. This study's short duration likely limited our ability to detect differences in tiller population growth as a function of garden or ecotype, emphasizing the need for long-term monitoring.

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 score0.060
Threshold uncertainty score0.915

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArctic ScienceSame topicBotany, Ecology, and Taxonomy StudiesFrench-language works237,207