Sexual dimorphism of reproductive allocation at shoot and tree levels in <i>Zanthoxylum ailanthoides</i>, a pioneer dioecious tree
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sexual dimorphisms are often found in reproductive allocation and vegetative growth, and these sexual dimorphisms may lead to a reduction of subsequent reproductive allocation in woody dioecious species. However, in some species, female-biased reproductive allocation does not result in a reduction of subsequent reproductive allocation in females. To clarify the mechanisms underlying this phenomenon, we studied the dioecious tree Zanthoxylum ailanthoides Sieb. et Zucc., in which leafing and inflorescence development occur sequentially. Reproductive allocation and vegetative growth were examined in both sexes at the shoot and tree levels. At tree level, they were evaluated with respect to flowering frequency and annual tree-ring width over 5 years. Reproductive allocation per shoot in females was 1.7× that in males. The ratio of reproductive to total current-year shoots per tree in males was 1.2× that in females. Reproductive allocation in females exceeded that of males by a factor of 1.5 at the tree level, which was less than that at the shoot level, owing to modular integrity. Biased vegetative growth was not detected at the leaf, shoot, or tree level, suggesting that a compensatory mechanism is not employed by this species. The results support the conclusion that a species-specific phenophase sequence of Z. ailanthoides enables females to achieve consecutive reproductive allocation.
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) | 0.000 | 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".