Floral scent and pollinators of the holoparasite <i>Pilostyles thurberi</i> (Apodanthaceae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Floral scent is likely important to the pollination of parasitic plants, despite that it has not been well-studied. We studied the pollination ecology of the North American stem holoparasite Pilostyles thurberi (Apodanthaceae) at two field sites in Texas. To identify effective pollinators, we collected floral visitors to P. thurberi flowers, observed their foraging behavior, and looked for P. thurberi pollen on their bodies. Augochloropsis metallica bees (Halictidae) and eumenine potter wasps (Vespidae) were pollinators. P. thurberi flowers are visually inconspicuous but produce a strong fruity fragrance. GC/MS analysis of whole floral extracts and dynamic headspace samples revealed the fragrance to be an unusually simple bouquet of raspberry ketone and several eugenols. Comparison of scent profiles to those from uninfected host plants (Dalea formosa) allowed putative separation of parasite and host volatiles. This is the first report of the constituents of floral fragrance in Apodanthaceae.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".