‘Anti-bee’ and ‘pro-bird’ changes during the evolution of hummingbird pollination in <i>Penstemon</i> flowers
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Floral phenotypes may be as much the result of selection for avoidance of some animal visitors as selection for improving the interaction with better pollinators. When specializing on hummingbird-pollination, Penstemon flowers may have evolved to improve the morphological fit between bird and flower, or to exclude less-efficient bees, or both. We hypothesized how such selection might work on four floral characters that affect the mechanics of pollen transfer: anther/stigma exsertion, presence of a lower corolla lip, width of the corolla tube, and angle of flower inclination. We surgically modified bee-pollinated P. strictus flowers changing one trait at a time to make them resemble hummingbird-pollinated P. barbatus flowers, and measured pollen transfer by bumblebees and hummingbirds. Results suggest that, apart from 'pro-bird' adaptations, specific 'anti-bee' adaptations have been important in shaping hummingbird-flowers. Moreover, some trait changes may have been selected for only if changing in concert with other traits.
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.
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) | 0.000 | 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 it