MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1998326224 · doi:10.3732/ajb.0900083

Consequences of variation in flowering time within and among individuals of <i>Mertensia fusiformis</i> (Boraginaceae), an early spring wildflower

2009· article· en· W1998326224 on OpenAlexafffund
Jessica R. K. Forrest, James D. Thomson

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Botany · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFonds Québécois de la Recherche sur la Nature et les Technologies
KeywordsBiologyPollenWildflowerPollinatorPerennial plantBoraginaceaePollinationBotanyReproductive successHorticultureDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Climate change is causing many plants to flower earlier in spring, exposing them to novel selection pressures, including-potentially-pollinator shortages. Over 2 years that contrasted in timing of flowering onset, we studied reproductive strategies, pollen limitation, and selection on flowering time in Mertensia fusiformis, a self-incompatible, spring-flowering perennial. Plants opened most of their flowers early in the flowering period, especially in 2007, the early year; but selection favored early-flowering individuals only in 2008. However, resource allocation to early vs. late seed production was flexible: In 2008, but not 2007, early flowers on a plant produced more and heavier seeds. Late flowers were capable of equal seed production if fertilization of early ovules was prevented, suggesting that late flowers serve a bet-hedging function. Evidence for pollen limitation was weak, although there was a tendency for early flowers to be pollen-limited in 2007 and for late flowers to be pollen-limited in 2008. Poor reproductive success in 2007 was likely attributable less to pollen limitation than to frost damage to flowers. We suggest that plasticity in floral longevity and resource allocation among flowers will make this species resilient to short-term pollinator deficits; whether this will help or hinder future adaptation is unclear.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.739
Threshold uncertainty score0.165

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.186 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations64
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of BotanySame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207