The role of rainfall and predators in determining synchrony in reproduction of savanna trees in Serengeti National Park, Tanzania
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary We examined the factors determining synchrony in reproduction in nine Acacia and six other tree species in the Serengeti ecosystem. We test two hypotheses: (i) an abiotic hypothesis where the primary determinant of synchrony is an adaptation to water availability; and (ii) biotic hypotheses where these adaptations to water can be further refined by additional adaptations to avoid predators, or attract seed and fruit dispersers. Flowering and fruiting were recorded monthly for individually marked trees during 1997–2004. Flowering in different species occurs semi‐annually, annually or, in the case of one species, once every 2 years. For most species synchrony of flowering was correlated with seasonal rainfall, with lags related to the mean height of the species; small species flowered during the rains while larger species flowered in the dry season. Fruiting seasons occurred at the end of the rains irrespective of the flowering season. Most species showed flowering synchrony greater than expected from the distribution of rainfall. This may be related to avoidance of insect seed predators through predator satiation. Two Acacias showed multi‐annual fruiting (masting), possibly as a predator avoidance mechanism. Acacia tortilis has two flowering seasons: a dry season flowering with early abortion of pods and a wet season flowering producing successful fruits. Two species of Commiphora appeared to be synchronized so as to attract birds that disperse seeds. Acacia tortilis produced indehiscent pods attractive to ungulates, possibly to kill bruchid beetles during digestion and so increase seed viability. Our results suggest that synchrony in these trees is caused by a strong interaction between abiotic and biotic factors. Closely related species have different reproductive patterns of synchrony that seem to be adapted to different combinations of rainfall, predators and dispersers. Rainfall is the primary determinant but the activities of predators and dispersers increase the degree of synchrony.
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 | 0.001 | 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 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".