MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6893052261 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.13727374

Comatricha afroalpina Rammeloo, Bull. Jard. Bot. Belg.

2018· article· en· W6893052261 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Education and Child Care
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSporeApex (geometry)ColumellaGenusStalk

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Comatricha afroalpina Rammeloo, Bull. Jard. Bot. Belg. 53(1/2):297 (1983). Figure 4. Scattered sporocarps are 1–2 mm in total height. The red-brown stalk is 0.5–1 mm tall. The sporothecae are spherical and dark brown. A tapered columella reaches almost to the apex in the smaller sporocarps. An abundant capillitium peripherally s an incomplete irregular network with numerous free ends. Grey-brown spores are regularly verruculose with dispersed groups of larger dark warts, which sometimes form an incomplete reticulum; the spores are 8–10 μm in diameter. Specimen examined: CHINA. Jiangxi Province, East China Institute of Technology, 17 June 2013, Zhang2016011102 (HMJAU-M1006). Discussion: The genus Comatricha Preuss has been reported to contain 41 species, but only two species, C. vineatilis and C. alpina, are similar to C. macrospora. Like C. macrospora, C. aplina has a persistent peridium at the base of the sporotheca; meanwhile C. vineatilis is similar to C. afroalpina in having regularly verruculose spores dispersed in larger groups. Comatricha vineatilis (spore size: 6–7 μm in diameter) has smaller spores than C. afroalpina (spore size: 8–10 μm in diameter), whereas C. alpina (spore size: 11–12 μm in diameter) is a nivicolous species and has larger spores than C. afroalpina.

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)0.000
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.112

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0240.006

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.192 · 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
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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)→Same topicMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions→French-language works237,207→