Leaf traits and herbivory levels in a tropical gymnosperm, <i>Zamia stevensonii</i> (Zamiaceae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PREMISE OF THE STUDY: Slow-growing understory cycads invest heavily in defenses to protect the few leaves they produce annually. The Neotropical cycad Zamia stevensonii has chemical and mechanical barriers against insect herbivores. Mechanical barriers, such as leaf toughness, can be established only after the leaf has expanded. Therefore, chemical defenses may be important during leaf expansion. How changes in leaf traits affect the feeding activity of cycad specialist insects is unknown. We investigated leaf defenses and incidence of specialist herbivores on Z. stevensonii during the first year after leaf flush. METHODS: Herbivore incidence, leaf production, and leaf traits that might affect herbivory-including leaf age, lamina thickness, resistance-to-fracture, work-to-fracture, trichome density, and chlorophyll, water, and toxic azoxyglycoside (AZG) content-were measured throughout leaf development. Principal component analysis and generalized linear models identified characteristics that may explain herbivore incidence. KEY RESULTS: Synchronized leaf development in Z. stevensonii is characterized by quick leaf expansion and delayed greening. Specialist herbivores feed on leaves between 10 and 100 d after flush and damage ∼37% of all leaflets produced. Young leaves are protected by AZGs, but these defenses rapidly decrease as leaves expand. Leaves older than 100 d are protected by toughness. CONCLUSIONS: Because AZG concentrations drop before leaves become sufficiently tough, there is a vulnerable period during which leaves are susceptible to herbivory by specialist insects. This slow-growing gymnosperm invests heavily in constitutive defenses against highly specialized herbivores, underlining the convergence in defensive syndromes by major plant lineages.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".