Sit-and-wait pollination in the spring flowering woodland plant, <i>Trillium grandiflorum</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In animal-pollinated plants, reproductive success is commonly limited by pollen availability, which can occur in environments where pollinator activity is scarce or variable. Extended floral longevity to maximize a plant’s access to pollinators may be an adaptation to such uncertain pollination environments. Here, we investigated the effects of flower exposure time to pollinators on female fertility (fruit and seed set) in the bee-pollinated woodland herb Trillium grandiflorum, a species with long-lived flowers (~17-21 d) that blooms in early spring when pollinator activity is often variable. We experimentally exposed flowers to pollinators for different amounts of time to determine the extent to which floral longevity influenced reproductive success. The amount of time that flowers were exposed to pollinators significantly increased fruit set and seed set per flower, but not seed set per fruit. Our results provide experimental evidence that long floral life spans may function as a ‘sit-and-wait’ pollination strategy to increase the amount of exposure time to pollinators and promote seed set in the unpredictable pollination environments often experienced by early spring ephemerals. In large populations with infrequent pollinator visitation, as commonly occurs in T. grandiflorum, pollination may be a largely stochastic process.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".