MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2084765649 · doi:10.1098/rspb.2005.3317

Spatial ecology of mating success in a sexually polymorphic plant

2005· article· en· W2084765649 on OpenAlexafffund
Ivana Stehlik, John P. Caspersen, Spencer C. H. Barrett

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsBiologyEcologyMatingMating systemSpatial ecologyBiological dispersalEvolutionary ecologyPollinationPollenContext (archaeology)PopulationDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The spatial context of reproduction is of crucial importance to plants because of their sessile habit. Since pollen and seed dispersal is often restricted, mating success is likely to depend on the quantity and quality of mates in local neighbourhoods. Here we use neighbourhood models to investigate the spatial ecology of pollination and mating in Narcissus assoanus, a sexually polymorphic plant with two mating morphs that differ in style length. By mapping individuals in eight populations from southwestern France, we investigated the influence of the density and morph identity of plants at different spatial scales on variation in female fertility. By using inferences on the expected patterns of pollen transfer based on floral morphology, we were able to predict the quantitative relations between local morph ratios and variation in fertility. Our analyses revealed differences in the spatial clustering of morphs and in their response to plant density and morph identity within local neighbourhoods. Mating success in N. assoanus was characterized by both density- and frequency-dependent processes, a condition that may be a general feature of the spatial ecology of plant mating.

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.179 · 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

Citations34
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences→Same topicPlant and animal studies→French-language works237,207→