Thermogenic flowering of the giant taro (<i>Alocasia macrorrhizos</i>, Araceae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The investigations of thermogenesis of Alocasia macrorrhizos (L.) G. Don inflorescences took place from December 2002 to February 2003, and from February 2004 to March 2004, in one of the wild populations on Espiritu Santo, Vanuatu (South Pacific). Temperatures were measured with six Copper-Constantan (type T) infra-millimetric thermocouples wired to a Campbell Scientific 10X data logger. The thermogenic period lasted 3642 h, and heating was documented on the male part and the sterile appendix. The highest temperatures were recorded on the sterile appendix. They started to rise slightly before midnight and peaked between 0545 and 0600, when the inflorescence odour became the most intense. The average maximum temperature of 59 investigated inflorescences was 43.9 ± 0.6 °C. The absolute maximum was 47.4 °C. The maximum deviation from the ambient air temperature was 25.6 °C. The heating of the male part began 1015 h before the inflorescence odour became the most intense and ended 23 h after the release of pollen. Its temperatures had two peaks: the first one appeared 15 min after the temperature peak of the sterile appendix, whereas the second one appeared at the time of the release of pollen. The dominating visitors of the flowering inflorescences were earwigs (Labidura truncata Kirby, Labiduridae, Dermaptera). Seed set was extremely rare.Key words: giant taro, Alocasia macrorrhizos, thermogenesis, inflorescence development, pollination.
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) | 0.000 | 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 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".