Visitation frequency of <i>Melampyrum roseum</i> var. <i>japonicum</i> (Scrophulariaceae) by three bumblebee species and its relation to pollination efficiency
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The efficiency of pollination of Melampyrum roseum Maximowicz var. japonicum Franchet et Savatier by three bumblebee species, Bombus consobrinus Vogt, Bombus diversus Smith, and Bombus honshuensis Tkalců, which differ especially in proboscis length, was examined under experimental conditions where visitation frequencies were controlled. First, we found that B. honshuensis, with the shortest proboscis, deposited the most pollen per stigma, resulting in the highest seed set in single visit experiments among the three bumblebee species, while B. diversus removed the most pollen from the anthers. The morphological match between pollinators and flowers was found to be an important factor affecting the per-visit pollination intensity mentioned above. Second, we found that seed set and pollen removal increased when flowers were visited twice by any of the three bumblebee species and that the differences among the three bumblebee species disappeared. When flowers were visited three or four times, the seed set and pollen removal did not increase further. These findings indicate that pollination effectiveness may differ among the bumblebee species only when flowers are infrequently visited by any of the bumblebee species.Key words: Melampyrum roseum, bumblebees, pollination efficiency, reproductive success, seed set, visitation frequency.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".