Clonal growth and reproductive strategies of the understory tropical palm<i>Geonoma brevispatha</i>: an ontogenetic approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigated the patterns of growth and reproduction of the understory clonal palm Geonoma brevispatha based on the identification of post-germinative ontogenetic stages, over a 3-year period. Genets were monitored in 100 5 × 5 m plots and 100 2 × 2 m subplots, in a 1-ha area of swamp forest in São Paulo state, southeastern Brazil. Ramets pass through four ontogenetic stages (bifid-leafed juveniles, pinnatifid-leafed stemless immatures, stemmed nonreproductive virgins, and reproducers). Leaf size, leaf number, and leaf production rate increased during ontogeny, but diameter growth rate was higher among immatures. Stem length, number of nodes, and leaf rachis length were positively correlated across ontogenetic stages, but crown height was smaller than stem length in adult palms because of frequent leaning. Leaf number and sexual fecundity increased with ramet size, but declined in larger, senescent ramets. Clonal fecundity preceded sexual fecundity, and sexual and clonal fecundity increased continuously with genet size. No relationship was found between sexual and clonal fecundity. Growth and survival strategies of G. brevispatha were consistent with the patterns found in other tropical clonal palm species. Sexual fecundity and cloning seem to be two integrated processes favored by environmental conditions that also support the growth of existing ramets.Key words: stage-structured populations, ontogenetic stages, swamp forest, Brazil, Atlantic forest, senescence.
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 | 0.001 | 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".