Relationships between flowering phenology, plant size, and female reproductive output in a dioecious shrub, <i>Ilex leucoclada</i> (Aquifoliaceae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Flowering phenology is critical for reproduction in dioecious species, but selection on timing of flowering may be weakened by physiological factors such as plant size, and external factors such as climate. We investigated the flowering phenology of male and female adults, and female reproductive output, in 10 patches with various sex ratios, of the dioecious shrub Ilex leucoclada (Maxim.) Makino over three consecutive years in an old-growth beech forest. Sexual dimorphism was observed in flowering amplitude, but not in other traits examined, including flowering onset date, duration, peak date, and synchrony with plants of the opposite sex in the population. Plant size had a consistent, positive effect on flowering amplitude in both sexes throughout the study period, but its effects on other factors, including the extent of fruit set, varied. Females in mixed patches showed higher fruit set than those in female patches. Furthermore, although the reproductive output of the female I. leucoclada plants is likely to be affected by flowering phenological traits in the mixed patches, the importance of these factor is probably modulated by other variables, including precipitation (which had a major effect on male flowering patterns) and the spatial distribution of the males.
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".