Bumble bee pollination of the sticky catchfly in a fragmented agricultural landscape
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Seed set and pollinator activity of bumble bees were examined in a fragmented population of sticky catchfly (Viscaria vulgaris). We focused on the potential effect of the spatial distribution of plant individuals at three hierarchical levels: islet level (outcrops with seminatural vegetation in the agricultural fields), patch level (aggregations of plant individuals within islets), and tussock level (plant individuals within patches). Size of patches and islets were study design parameters, whereas isolation at the patch and islet level and size at the tussock level were treated in the analysis as covariates. Isolation of islets and patches had no significant effect on the response variables (seed set and bumble bee activity). However, the isolation of islets and patches was quite small compared to the activity range of bumble bees in the study area. While islet size seemed to be unimportant, both pollinator activity and seed set increased with increasing patch and tussock size, whereas the frequency of aborted seeds decreased. The increased seed set of larger and presumably older patches and tussocks indicate that to maximize viability of a fragmented, perennial herb population, it is important to minimize local disturbance so that individual subpopulations may develop over time.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".