MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7056752683

Inter- and intraspecific variations of the chemical properties of high-Arctic mosses along water-regime gradients

2009· article· en· W7056752683 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueInstitutional Repository National Institute of Polar Research (National Institute of Polar Research (Japan)) · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMagnetic Field Sensors Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNucleofectionGestational periodHyporeflexiaDemotionArticular cartilage damageTSG101
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We examined and compared the contents of organic chemical components (lignin-like compounds, total carbohydrates and extractives), carbon and nutrients (nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium, calcium, magnesium) among the mosses Calliergon giganteum, Hylocomium splendens, Racomitrium lanuginosum, and among three populations of H. splendens collected from habitats in contrasting water regimes in the Canadian high-arctic tundra. C:N:P ratios were analyzed among and within moss species. Mosses from hydric habitats had lower total carbohydrate and higher nutrients contents than did mosses from drier habitats; however, we found no intraspecific variations in nitrogen and calcium contents in the different populations of H. splendens along water-regime gradients. The contents in lignin-like compounds, extractives and carbon showed no clear trends along water-regime gradients. Mosses from hydric habitats had lower C:N, C:P and N:P ratios than mosses from drier habitats, although we found no intraspecific variations in C:N ratios in H. splendens along water-regime gradients. These results suggest that chemical properties of mosses, especially nutrient contents, are strongly correlated with water availability in high-Arctic tundra.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.080

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.259 · 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 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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInstitutional Repository National Institute of Polar Research (National Institute of Polar Research (Japan))Same topicMagnetic Field Sensors TechniquesFrench-language works237,207