Within-species leaf size–number trade-offs in herbaceous angiosperms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Leafing intensity—number of leaves produced per unit of supporting (nonleaf, aboveground) dry mass—determines the size of a plant’s “bud bank”, i.e., the number of axillary meristems per unit plant body or shoot size. This in turn determines the plant’s capacity for flexible and economic meristem deployment strategies as vegetative or reproductive structures. From recent research, it is now widely established that leafing intensity has a strong and isometrically negative relationship with individual leaf mass at the between-species level for both woody and herbaceous species. In the present study of 24 natural populations of herbaceous angiosperms, we show that these two traits also have a general trade-off relationship at the between-plant level within a species. Smaller resident reproductive (i.e., mature) plants generally produced smaller leaves, and plants with smaller leaves generally had higher leafing intensity, in most cases involving an isometric trade-off. For several species, however, the trade-off was allometric—i.e., plants with smaller leaves, which also had generally smaller body sizes, had generally greater than proportionally higher leafing intensity. This parallels results of an earlier study at the between-species level suggesting that, when plant body size is relatively small, there may be a premium—in terms of maximizing fitness—on relatively high leafing intensity. The latter, it is proposed, may function in maximizing the capacity for “reproductive economy”, i.e., successful reproduction despite intense size suppression owing to competition.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".