A test of the reserve meristem hypothesis using <i>Verbascum thapsus</i> (Scrophulariaceae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The reserve meristem hypothesis predicts that latent meristems may act as a bet-hedging strategy given high-cost, predictable herbivory. Under this hypothesis, damage to a plant should elicit greater branching. This prediction was tested in Verbascum thapsus with three experiments manipulating the intensity and type of damage to reproductive tissue. In the first experiment, seed set was prevented in the treatment group by stigma excision and lanolin application to 80% of the flowers of each plant. In the second experiment, a minimum of two mating pairs of weevils were added to treated plants prior to the onset of flowering. In the third experiment, all fruits were sliced lengthwise twice. All three treatments significantly reduced seed set. In the first two experiments, treated plants significantly increased degree of branching (branch number and total branch length). This supports the reserve meristem hypothesis as an explanation for greater branching in larger plants of V. thapsus. Interestingly, the fruit destruction experiment failed to elicit a branching response, which suggests that the timing of damage is important.
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".