The effect of gut passage by two species of avian frugivore on seeds of pokeweed, <i>Phytolacca</i> <i>americana</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although avian frugivores are known to be important dispersers of seeds of pokeweed, Phytolacca americana L., there are no studies that rigorously examine the effect of gut passage through avian frugivores on P. americana seeds. I examined how passage through avian frugivores affected the proportion of P. americana seeds germinating, the rate of germination (average number of days required for all seeds to germinate), and the total number of viable seeds. Field-collected fruits were either cleaned of pulp (control seeds), fed to northern Mockingbirds (Mimus polyglottos), or fed to Brown Thrashers (Toxostoma rufum). The proportion of seeds germinating after passage through avian frugivores was greater than control seeds (0.88 vs. 0.67, respectively), but did not differ between Mockingbirds or Brown Thrashers. However, seeds consumed by Mockingbirds germinated significantly faster on average (4.2 d) compared with seeds consumed by Brown Thrashers (4.6 d). Consumption by either species led to faster germination than control seeds (5.5 d). The total number of viable seeds did not differ among seeds consumed by avian frugivores or control seeds. These results suggest that avian frugivores do not change the viability of P. americana seeds. Rather, avian frugivores shifted the timing of germination, such that more seeds germinate more quickly after passage through frugivores. The adaptive implications of accelerated germination following passage through frugivores are briefly discussed.Key words: dispersal, frugivore, germination, viability.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".