MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7124230603

Effects of specimen degradation on herbarium leaf spectroscopy

2025· other· en· W7124230603 on OpenAlexafffund
Rykkar Jackson

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2025
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersUniversity of British Columbia
KeywordsHerbariumPartial least squares regressionSpectroscopyRange (aeronautics)Spectral signatureTraitPlant taxonomyLignin
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There are ~400 million plant specimens held in ~3,500 herbaria worldwide today. Along with their long-established role in cataloguing species taxonomy and distribution, herbarium specimens are increasingly being used to measure ecologically important plant traits, often via spectral analyses. Such analyses quantify the interaction between plant matter and electromagnetic radiation across wavelengths, revealing spectral signatures that are linked to traits via statistical modelling. Once models are developed, these vast collections may facilitate leaf functional trait estimation across wide spatial and temporal scales. These methods may also allow for the analysis of foreign, extirpated, or even extinct species non-destructively within local herbaria. But for this to occur on a wide scale, proof of concept must be provided for the use of older or more degraded specimens, as many specimens in herbaria exhibit some degree of degradation. This research aims to provide the basis for the use of a wider range of specimens in spectral analyses. To do this, we devised an experiment wherein Ginkgo biloba specimens were prepared and placed in four temperature treatments of varying intensity and measured annually to determine whether their spectra can accurately estimate functional traits as specimens degrade. We employed partial least squares regression (PLSR) analyses to assess whether dried-leaf reflectance spectra can estimate a suite of structural/water-related- and chemical-based functional traits over time and across treatments. Our results indicate that, across models, leaf mass per area and cellulose were consistently the best estimated whereas pigment and lignin contents were consistently poorly predicted. We found that collection season, years since collection, nor storage condition affected PLSR model performance and trait estimation, despite trends in spectra indicating degradation. This provides promise for the use of a larger proportion of the global stock of herbarium specimens in spectral analyses, providing non-destructive, low-cost, efficient means of trait estimation.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.179
Teacher spread0.174 · 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 designBench or experimental
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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)→French-language works237,207→