Comparative flower structure of three species of sundew (<i>Drosera anglica</i>,<i>Drosera linearis</i>, and<i>Drosera rotundifolia</i>) in relation to breeding system
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Whereas much attention has been given to the fascinating prey-trapping leaves of carnivorous plants, less research has been conducted on their flower structure and breeding systems. Accordingly, a comparative study of the floral morphology and anatomy of the three species of sundews (Droseraceae: Drosera anglica Huds., Drosera linearis Goldie, and Drosera rotundifolia L.) in Saskatchewan was performed to ascertain the presence of floral rewards for potential pollinators and to obtain pollen to ovule ratios, an indicator of breeding system. Utilizing light and scanning electron microscopy, differences between the three species were apparent in length of styles, number of placentas, anther and pollen colour, and structure of glandular trichomes on sepals. The occurrence of features unique to each species does not support the concept of D. anglica as a hybrid of the other two species. Flowers of all three species lack nectaries, although clusters of papillate cells that were reminiscent of secretory tissue were observed at the apices of anthers and at the summits of ovaries. Pollen to ovule ratios were low for all species, ranging from 9.0 to 18.7 in D. rotundifolia and D. linearis, respectively, suggesting an autogamous breeding system for each species.Key words: Drosera anglica, Drosera linearis, Drosera rotundifolia, Droseraceae, comparative flower structure, pollen to ovule ratios, breeding system.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".