Can Crataegus douglasii be found in Québec?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The North American Douglas hawthorn, C. douglasii Lindl., is widespread in the Pacific Northwest, with a disjunct occurrence in the Upper Great Lakes basin. In addition, two Ontario specimens document the occurrence of this species in the Hudson Bay drainage, near Lake Abitibi. Unlike other Ontario hawthorn species (and many Ontario tree species generally) C. douglasii in eastern North America appears to be confined almost entirely to areas in close proximity to shorelines of the upper Great Lakes. Its distribution in Ontario bears little resemblance to that of other plant species that together give rise to the climate- and substrate-controlled ecozones and forest regions in this part of the continent. One hypothesis that has been advanced to explain this difference is the role of periglacial lakes as migration routes from west to east, and the limited ability of black-fruited C. douglasii to expand into the hinterland now occupied by red-fruited hawthorns that, together with many other woody species now dominant, most likely recolonized the Great Lakes basin from refugia in southeastern North America. This poster aims to renew awareness of these biogeographic questions and stimulate botanists to look for hitherto ignored or undiscovered occurrences of Douglas hawthorn in northwestern Québec.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".