Inbreeding depression and floral type fitness differences in<i>Viola canadensis</i>(Violaceae), a species with chasmogamous and cleistogamous flowers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Few studies of inbreeding depression have focused on species producing both showy, chasmogamous (CH) flowers and self-pollinated, cleistogamous (CL) flowers. The goals of this investigation were to measure the level of inbreeding depression in the North American violet, Viola canadensis L., and to determine if any fitness differences were linked to floral type (CH versus CL) rather than to cross type (self versus outcross). Hand pollinations were carried out to produce self- and outcross-pollinated CH progeny, and CL seeds were also collected. In a greenhouse, selfed and outcrossed CH flowers produced similar numbers of seeds, and both types of progeny had similar survival rates and comparable numbers of CH flowers, although outcrossed CH progeny had 14% greater vegetative biomass than selfed CH progeny. The level of inbreeding depression in V. canadensis was low, indicating that there may be few drawbacks to selfing in this species. A comparison of CL and self-pollinated CH progeny showed that, although there were differences in CH flower number, overall fitness differences were minimal. The similar performance of selfed (CL and CH) and outcrossed progeny in early life-history stages of V. canadensis suggests a history of inbreeding in the population.Key words: cleistogamy, inbreeding depression, outcrossing, selfing, Viola canadensis.
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".