Analysis of the spatial genetic structure of<i>Passiflora incarnata</i>in recently disturbed sites
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In early successional species, short life span and frequent spatial relocation may affect the distribution of genetic variation but the pattern may be altered by reproductive patterns. Passiflora incarnata L. (Passifloraceae), an early successional vine found throughout the southeastern United States, reproduces sexually and asexually through clonal sprouts. We examined the genetic structure of P. incarnata in recently disturbed habitats at three spatial scales: within a patch, among patches separated by 250 m, and between sites separated by 10 km. Genetic variation may be clumped at the scale of neighboring plants if stem resprouting is significant. In each patch, eleven arbitrarily selected plants and their four nearest neighbors were mapped and leaf samples were collected for genetic analysis. The multilocus genotype of each individual for seven polymorphic allozymes was determined. Potential clones were determined by estimating the probability of a second occurrence of each genotype and a multilocus coefficient of coancestry. Data indicated P. incarnata was reproducing primarily sexually. Most of the genetic variation was within a patch with little variation among patches. These data suggest that the genetic structure of this colonizing species was determined by founder effects interacting with long distance pollen movement.Key words: allozymes, passionflower, spatial, genetic structure, early colonizer, Passiflora incarnata.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".