MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2034809138 · doi:10.1111/1365-2745.12330

The consequences of demand‐driven seed provisioning for sexual differences in reproductive investment in<i>Thalictrum occidentale</i>(Ranunculaceae)

2014· article· en· W2034809138 on OpenAlexafffund
Takashi Y. Ida, Lawrence D. Harder, Gaku Kudo

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Ecology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBiologyRanunculaceaeSemelparity and iteroparityPerennial plantSex allocationReproductive successSexual reproductionOvuleRhizomeBotanyReproductionEcologyPollenPopulationDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Many iteroparous angiosperms may benefit from flexible annual resource allocation in response to variable reproductive opportunities induced by external conditions. If maximal reproductive investment is fixed, lack of reproductive sinks would cause resource redistribution to other sinks. Alternatively, reproductive investment may vary depending on the demand of reproductive sinks, changing source–sink relations. In particular, differential responses by males and females to the demands of flower and seed production may cause sexual dimorphism. We assess the occurrence of demand‐driven seed allocation by females and its implications for sexual differences in reproductive investment, including the dynamics of mass and carbon allocation and the physiological cost of reproduction, for a dioecious, perennial herb, Thalictrum occidentale . We specifically quantified allocation responses to partial defoliation, which reduced current resource supply, and partial flower/fruit removal, which reduced the aggregate demand of reproductive sinks. During flowering, males preferentially invested carbon and mass in flowers at the expense of vegetative organs, whereas females allocated less mass to flowers and invested more in new rhizome production for future performance than males. In contrast, during early fruiting, both sexes had new rhizomes of similar size and a doubling of reproductive mass by females after flowering resulted in similar total reproductive investment for both sexes. Manipulation of the source–sink balance did not influence carbon allocation, except that partial fruit removal increased new rhizome mass compared with intact plants. Females with many fertilized ovules invested proportionally more in seed number and mass per seed than females with few fertilized ovules, indicating both demand‐driven seed maturation and its elimination of seed size‐number trade‐off. Furthermore, males consistently exhibited size‐dependent flower production, whereas females exhibited size‐dependent flower production only if they had not reproduced during the previous year. Synthesis . This study demonstrates that sexual differences in policies of reproductive investment and the timing of the physiological costs of reproduction impose contrasting allocation schedules. Males invested in reproduction proportionally with their size, whereas females invested flexibly in seeds in response to the demand of developing embryos. Thus, the contrasting certainty and timing of reproductive resource requirements between the sexes contribute to sexual dimorphism.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.087
Threshold uncertainty score0.414

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.237
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations13
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of EcologySame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207