MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2034448744 · doi:10.1139/b00-033

Cost of apical dominance in two monocarpic herbs, <i>Erysimum strictum</i> and <i>Rhinanthus minor</i>

2000· article· en· W2034448744 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ari‐Pekka Huhta, Juha Tuomi, Pasi Rautio

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Botany · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsApical dominanceBiologyBotanyDominance (genetics)ShootHorticulture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Apical dominance is advantageous in conditions favoring rapid growth in height and unbranched architecture. The cost of apical dominance, on the other hand, should be expressed in conditions where fecundity increases along with an increasing number of branches. Apical damage can be used to measure such costs: when suppressed meristems are released from apical inhibition, the vegetative and reproductive productivity of initially unbranched plants should increase owing to the regrowth and increased branch development following damage. We studied these regrowth responses in two monocarpic herbs, Erysimum strictum P. Gaertn., B. Mey., and Scherb. and Rhinanthus minor L., after both apical damage (10% of the shoot cut) and more extensive damage (50 and 75% cutting). Both species tolerated apical damage, although severe damage had detrimental effects on the performance of both, especially R. minor. Apical damage had positive effects on most of the measured performance parameters of Erysimum. However, the success of seed germination collapsed, presumably due to delayed flowering and less successful pollination. The response was parallel in Rhinanthus; apical damage affected neither the vegetative biomass nor fecundity, but heavier damage, especially 75% clipping, led to severe reductions in most performance measures. The differences in regrowth responses are presumably due to the different habitat requirements of the species. Rhinanthus prefers relatively dense vegetation and starts to branch and produce flowers after a certain threshold in height has been reached, whereas Erysimum prefers gaps in vegetation. In this species, unbranched architecture may be favored in closed vegetation and branched architecture in less competitive habitats. In both species, fruit production correlated positively with the number of branches in both control and clipped plants, which is consistent with the assumption of the cost of apical dominance.Key words: apical dominance, competition, damage, meristem, overcompensation, regrowth.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.186 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations32
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of BotanySame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207