MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2098758437 · doi:10.1139/b2012-004

Reproductive investment at stem and genet levels in male and female plants of the clonal dioecious shrub <i>Ilex leucoclada</i> (Aquifoliaceae)

2012· article· en· W2098758437 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Takeshi Torimaru, Nobuhiro Tomaru

Bibliographic record

VenueBotany · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyShrubInflorescenceSexual dimorphismDioecyReproductive successBotanyZoologyPollenDemographyPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The sexual dimorphism of reproductive investment (measured as dry mass of reproductive tissues) at stem and whole plant (i.e., genet) levels in a dioecious clonal shrub, Ilex leucoclada (Maxim.) Makino., was examined over 2 consecutive years. Five patches in which different genets had already been distinguished using molecular markers in a previous study were selected, and the stem length, numbers of flowers and fruits, and sex of each stem were recorded. Fresh inflorescences and fruits were randomly sampled to estimate the reproductive investment of each stem. The male plants invested more resources in flowering at both the stem and genet levels than female plants, but females invested more resources than males when fruit masses were considered in addition to flower masses. The degrees of sexual dimorphism in reproductive investment at the stem and genet levels were similar, for both flowering alone and flowering plus fruiting. However, the reproductive investment was more restricted to large stems in female genets than in males. Inter-year fluctuations in reproductive investment were greater for females than males at both levels. These results suggest that patterns of reproductive investment should be examined simultaneously at multiple modular levels to obtain a thorough understanding of gender-associated variations in clonal plants.

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 score0.003

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.154 · 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

Citations4
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBotanySame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207