Bibliographic record
Abstract
Flowering plants display spectacular floral diversity and a bewildering array of reproductive adaptations that promote mating, particularly outbreeding. A striking feature of this diversity is that related species often differ in pollination and mating systems, and intraspecific variation in sexual traits is not unusual, especially among herbaceous plants. This variation provides opportunities for evolutionary biologists to link micro-evolutionary processes to the macro-evolutionary patterns that are evident within lineages. Here, I provide some personal reflections on recent progress in our understanding of the ecology and evolution of plant reproductive diversity. I begin with a brief historical sketch of the major developments in this field and then focus on three of the most significant evolutionary transitions in the reproductive biology of flowering plants: the pathway from outcrossing to predominant self-fertilization, the origin of separate sexes (females and males) from hermaphroditism and the shift from animal pollination to wind pollination. For each evolutionary transition, I consider what we have discovered and some of the problems that still remain unsolved. I conclude by discussing how new approaches might influence future research in plant reproductive biology.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".