MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2103653708 · doi:10.1086/678982

Evolutionary and Ecological Consequences of Multiscale Variation in Pollen Receipt for Seed Production

2014· article· en· W2103653708 on OpenAlexaff
Sebastian J. Schreiber, Jay A. Rosenheim, Neal Williams, Lawrence D. Harder

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Naturalist · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsOvulePollenBiologyReceiptZygoteVariation (astronomy)Evolutionary ecologyPollinationPollen tubeBotanyEcologyEmbryoEconomicsEmbryogenesis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Variation in resource availability can select for traits that reduce the negative impacts of this variability on mean fitness. Such selection may be particularly potent for seed production in flowering plants, as they often experience variation in pollen receipt among individuals and among flowers within individuals. Using analytically tractable models, we examine the optimal allocations for producing ovules, attracting pollen, and maturing seeds in deterministic and stochastic pollen environments. In deterministic environments, the optimal strategy attracts sufficient pollen to fertilize every ovule and mature every zygote into a seed. Stochastic environments select for allocations proportional to the risk of seed production being limited by zygotes or seed maturation. When producing an ovule is cheap and maturing a seed is expensive, among-plant variation selects for attracting more pollen at the expense of producing fewer ovules and having fewer resources for seed maturation. Despite this increased allocation, such populations are likely to be pollen limited. In contrast, within-plant variation generally selects for an overproduction of ovules and, to a lesser extent, pollen attraction. Such populations are likely to be resource limited and exhibit low seed-to-ovule ratios. These results highlight the importance of multiscale variation in the evolution and ecology of resource allocations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.925
Threshold uncertainty score0.232

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American NaturalistSame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207