Reciprocal gender effects of a keystone alpine plant species on other plants, pollinators, and arthropods
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The term facilitation generally describes positive interactions between plants, and a common approach in these studies is to identify a dominant plant to structure sampling. Unfortunately, whilst this field has rapidly expanded community ecology, it rarely includes other trophic levels such as insects and pollinators. Here, we combine facilitation, pollination, and reciprocity measures to explore the general hypothesis that sexual dimorphism in a benefactor plant species mediates its impact. The following three predictions were tested and supported using the gynodioecious alpine cushion plant Silene acaulis (L.) Jacq.: (i) that the trait set of a gynodioecious benefactor plant varies between genders; (ii) that dimorphism changes the facilitation of other plants, arthropods, and pollinators; and (iii) that insect selectivity, particularly pollinators, reciprocally impacts the reproductive output of the two genders. Female S. acaulis cushion plants produced significantly more flowers but they were smaller than those of hermaphrodites. Hermaphrodite cushions facilitated other plant species and pollinators more effectively than females, whilst females strongly facilitated more arthropods. Finally, female plants have significantly higher reproductive output as estimated by fruit and seed production, and this was directly related to visitation rate by pollinators. Hence, this study clearly establishes the value of combining some of the common themes of pollination biology such as sexual dimorphism, floral morphology, and measuring reproduction with the study of positive plant–plant interactions.
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".