Clinal variation and phenology in two conspecifics of Phragmites australis (Cav.) Trin. Ex Steud in Northeastern North America: implications for current management and future climate change
Bibliographic record
Abstract
LIST OF FIGURES 3.1 Location of study sites within isotherms …………………………………... 33 4.1 Average cumulative GDDs with error bars representing measurement error required to initiate the emergence of inflorescences and flowering in non-native P. australis populations in relation to seasonal GDDs…..…………………………………………………………..40 4.2 Average height of native and non-native haplotypes of P. australis in relation to seasonal GDDs……………….……………………………..... 41 S.1 The number of visually viable seeds out of 50 intact seed casing in non-native P .australispopulations across isotherms as determined by the classical unimbibed seed crush test ……………………………………..82 S.2 The number of visually viable seeds out of 50 intact seed casing in native P. australis populations across isotherms as determined by the classical unimbibed seed crush test ………………………………….83S.3 The number of Claviceps sclerotia out of 50 intact seed casing in non-native P. australis populations across isotherms……………………….84 S.4 The number of Claviceps sclerotia out of 50 intact seed casing in native P. australis populations across isotherms…………………………… 85 S.5 The number of germinated seeds out of 10 within each Petri dish in non-native P. australis populations across isotherms ...…………….86 S.6 The number of germinated seeds out of 10 within each Petri v dish in native P. australis populations across isotherms ….………………...87 S.7 The number of contaminated seeds out of 10 within each Petri dish in non-native P. australis populations across isotherms ………….……88S.8 The number of contaminated seeds out of 10 within each Petri dish in native P. australis populations across isotherms ……………………89 vi
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".