Les diatomées fossiles de deux tourbières ombrotrophes du Bas-Saint-Laurent, Québec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Les diatomées fossiles de deux tourbières ombrotrophes du Bas-Saint-Laurent, Québec, comprennent 34 genres et 143 taxons dont seulement 49 sont communs aux deux tourbières. La distribution stratigraphiques des taxons spécifiques et les associations de diatomées permettent d'observer l'évolution des tourbières étudiées. La tourbière à sphaignes de Rivière-du-Loup possède une flore fossile hydroterrestre et acidobionte (association à Eunotia paludosa et var. pumila et E. tenella) assez stable. Dans les 30 cm supérieurs, l'association mono-spécifique à E. paludosa var. pumila suggère un changement notable dans la végétation de sphaignes et un environnement écologique plus rigoureux. Les sédiments de la pessière à sphaignes de la tourbière du Fleuve contiennent une flore qui a probablement évolué depuis un milieu stagnant, franchement minérotrophe et légèrement acide (association à Cymbella aspera et Pinnularia cf. sfreptoraphe) à des conditions oligotrophes. acides et sub-aériennes (association à E. paludosa, Pinnularia aff. hilseana et P. subcapitata). Ces flores distinctes sont attribuées principalement à des trophismes et acidités différents. E. paludosa var. pumila, Navicula subtillissima et Asterionella ralfsii var. americana sont typiques de la tourbière de Rivière-du-Loup et reflètent des conditions ombrotrophes strictes. E. paludosa, P. aff. hilseana et P. subcapitata caractérisent la tourbière du Fleuve et suggèrent des eaux légèrement minérotrophes et moins acides. Les fluctuations négatives et positives des teneurs absolues en valves pourraient impliquer des conditions plus sèches ou plus humides strictement locales ou, peut-être, liées à des phases climatiques.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: yes | Observational | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: yes | Observational | high |
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
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".