Bee visit rates vary with floral morphology among highbush blueberry cultivars (<i><scp>V</scp>accinium corymbosum </i><scp>L</scp>.)
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
Abstract As the human population has increased, so too has the demand for biotically pollinated crops. B ees ( A poidea ) are essential for pollen transfer and fruit production in many crops, and their visit patterns can be influenced by floral morphology. Here, we considered the role of floral morphology on visit rates and behaviour of managed honey bees ( A pis mellifera ) and wild bumble bees (genus B ombus ), for four highbush blueberry cultivars ( V accinium corymbosum L .). We measured five floral traits for each cultivar, finding significant variation among cultivars. Corolla throat diameter may be the main morphological determinant of visit rates of honey bees, which is significantly higher on the wider flowers of cv. ‘Duke’ than on ‘ B luecrop’ or ‘ D raper’. Honey bees also visited cv. ‘Duke’ legitimately but were frequent nectar robbers on the long, narrow flowers of cv. ‘ B luecrop’. Bumble bees were infrequent (and absent on cv. ‘ D raper’) but all observed visits were legitimate. Crop yield was highest for the cultivar with the highest combined (honey bee + bumble bee) visit rate, suggesting that aspects of floral morphology that affect pollinator visit patterns should be considered in crop breeding initiatives.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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