MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W1776520721 · doi:10.4141/cjps2012-026

Berry unexpected: Nocturnal pollination of lowbush blueberry

2012· article· en· W1776520721 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
G. Christopher Cutler, K. W. Reeh, Jason M. Sproule, Krilen Ramanaidu

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Plant Science · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsNova Scotia Department of AgricultureDalhousie University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPollinationBerryVacciniumBiologyNocturnalEricaceaeHorticulturePollinatorFructificationBotanyPollenEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cutler, C. G., Reeh, K. W., Sproule, J. M. and Ramanaidu, K. 2012. Berry unexpected: Nocturnal pollination of lowbush blueberry. Can. J. Plant Sci. 92: 707–711. Lowbush blueberry, Vaccinium angustifolium, is an economically important crop of eastern North America that is critically dependent on insect-mediated cross-pollination for successful fruit set and high yields. It is generally assumed that bees are responsible for the vast majority of lowbush blueberry pollination, and producers usually augment the natural pollination force with managed bees. Little is known, however, of the potential role of nocturnal pollinators in lowbush blueberry production. We conducted a field experiment where patches of blooming blueberry were exposed to flying insects 24 h a day, only during the day (sunrise to sunset), only at night (sunset to sunrise), or 0 h a day. We found that significant fruit set occurred on blueberry stems that were exposed only at night, although it was higher on stems exposed during the day or 24 h a day. However, ripe fruit produced on stems exposed only at night weighed just as much as those exposed 24 h. Captures with Malaise traps activated only at night consisted mainly of several families of Lepidoptera and Diptera, although we do not know if these taxa pollinated blueberries. We conclude that nocturnal pollination may contribute significantly to lowbush blueberry fruit set.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.998
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.160 · 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

Citations45
Published2012
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Plant Science→Same topicPlant and animal studies→French-language works237,207→