The breeding system and effectiveness of introduced and native pollinators of the endangered tropical tree <i>Goetzea elegans</i> (Solanaceae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The impact of introduced species on native organisms is one of the main conservation concerns around the world. To fully understand the effect of introduced pollinators on native plants, it is important to know the reproductive biology of the focal species, especially its pollination biology. In this study we examined the breeding system of the endangered tree Goetzea elegans (Solanaceae), and compared pollination effectiveness of the two main floral visitors, Coereba flaveola (an avian nectarivore), and Apis mellifera (the introduced European Honeybee). We assessed the breeding system of G. elegans by applying several pollination treatments to flowers of cultivated trees to test fruit set, seed set, and seed viability. We also examined the pollination efficiency of A. mellifera and C. flaveola , and compared all the treatments with positive and negative controls. Our results indicate that the introduced honeybee A. mellifera is as efficient as the native bird C. flaveola in pollinating the flowers of G. elegans. This study also showed that G. elegans requires cross–pollination for fruit and seed set, and to obtain high seed viability rates. Despite the fact that many studies report exotic species as detrimental for native organisms, we document a case where an introduced insect has a beneficial impact on the reproductive biology of an endangered tropical tree.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".