37 Production, survival and morphology of kelp (protista) “sporophytes” arising from selfings, apogamy and hybridizations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The production and survival of sporophyte morphologies that arose from selfings, parthenogenesis, male apogamy and reciprocal hybridizations of Costaria costata (C.A. Agardh) Saunders, Laminaria saccharina (L) Lamouroux, Alaria marginata Postels and Ruprecht, Eisenia arborea Areschoug, Lessoniopsis littoralis (Tilden) Reinke, Macrocystis integrifolia Bory, and Nereocystis leutkeana (Mertens) Postels and Ruprecht was tracked for 215 hybridization trials for 30 weeks. Each trial consisted of selfings for each species, solo cultures of males and females for each species and reciprocal crossings. At the end of 30 weeks, “sporophyte” survival in the 215 cases was 13% for selfings, 10% for parthenogenesis, 6% for apogamy, and 16% for the reciprocal hybridizations. The morphologies of sporophytes resulting from selfings were typical of the selfed species. Parthenosporophytes and reciprocal hybrids usually had the distinctive morphology of the female parent. Male, apogamously derived “sporophytes” often had reduced morphological features. For example, A. marginata male apogamous sporophytes often lacked a midrib. The sporophyte morphologies that arose in the reciprocal crossings are considered to be putative hybrids. Molecular evidence is required to establish their genetic origins.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".