The sexual neighborhood through time: competition and facilitation for pollination in <i>Lobelia cardinalis</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reproductive success in flowering plants is influenced by the morphology and timing of reproductive structures as well as the density of surrounding conspecifics. In species with separate male and female flower phases, successful pollen transfer is also expected to vary with the density and ratio of surrounding male and female flowers. Increased density of surrounding flowers may increase pollinator visitation rates, but the densities of male and female flowers will determine the availability of pollen and the strength of competition for pollen receipt. Here we (1) quantify the influence of surrounding plant density on total seasonal fruit and seed production, (2) quantify the influence of sexual neighborhood (surrounding sex ratio and densities of male- and female-phase flowers) on fruit and seed production for individual flowers presented within the season, and (3) compare the influence of plant density on fitness to that of focal plant phenotype, specifically stigma-nectary distance and plant height, in a natural population of the pollen-limited, hummingbird-pollinated hermaphrodite Lobelia cardinalis. These relationships were examined at four spatial scales (10, 20, 50, and 100 cm). By examining temporal and spatial scales we found that (1) total seed production per plant decreased with increasing plant density at the smallest scale but increased with increasing density at all larger scales; (2) at any given time, a female-phase flower benefited from a higher density of surrounding male-phase flowers and a lower density of surrounding female-phase flowers; (3) when sex ratio was explicitly analyzed, a female-phase flower benefited from a lower proportion of surrounding female flowers as well as a lower total flower density; and (4) at the whole-plant level, taller plants were more likely to produce fruit (even when accounting for total number of flowers produced), consistent with pollinator preference for taller floral displays. Our results suggest that the local density of male and female flowers (and surrounding sex ratio) influences successful pollen transfer, implying that the local floral environment may shape how attraction traits like plant height are related to fitness.
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 | 0.000 | 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".