The interplay between inflorescence development and function as the crucible of architectural diversity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Most angiosperms present flowers in inflorescences, which play roles in reproduction, primarily related to pollination, beyond those served by individual flowers alone. An inflorescence's overall reproductive contribution depends primarily on the three-dimensional arrangement of the floral canopy and its dynamics during its flowering period. These features depend in turn on characteristics of the underlying branching structure (scaffold) that supports and supplies water and nutrients to the floral canopy. This scaffold is produced by developmental algorithms that are genetically specified and hormonally mediated. Thus, the extensive inflorescence diversity evident among angiosperms evolves through changes in the developmental programmes that specify scaffold characteristics, which in turn modify canopy features that promote reproductive performance in a particular pollination and mating environment. Nevertheless, developmental and ecological aspects of inflorescences have typically been studied independently, limiting comprehensive understanding of the relations between inflorescence form, reproductive function, and evolution. SCOPE: This review fosters an integrated perspective on inflorescences by summarizing aspects of their development and pollination function that enable and guide inflorescence evolution and diversification. CONCLUSIONS: The architecture of flowering inflorescences comprises three related components: topology (branching patterns, flower number), geometry (phyllotaxis, internode and pedicel lengths, three-dimensional flower arrangement) and phenology (flower opening rate and longevity, dichogamy). Genetic and developmental evidence reveals that these components are largely subject to quantitative control. Consequently, inflorescence evolution proceeds along a multidimensional continuum. Nevertheless, some combinations of topology, geometry and phenology are represented more commonly than others, because they serve reproductive function particularly effectively. For wind-pollinated species, these combinations often represent compromise solutions to the conflicting physical influences on pollen removal, transport and deposition. For animal-pollinated species, dominant selective influences include the conflicting benefits of large displays for attracting pollinators and of small displays for limiting among-flower self-pollination. The variety of architectural components that comprise inflorescences enable diverse resolutions of these conflicts.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".