Fitness consequences of branching in <i>Verbascum thapsus</i> (Scrophulariaceae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The reserve meristem hypothesis proposes that strong apical dominance suppresses lateral meristems and branches to escape from predictable damage (herbivory). This hypothesis was tested for Verbascum thapsus and its seed predator the weevil Gynmnetron tetrum by two mensurative experiments. The following predictions were made under this hypothesis: the proportion of individuals branched within a population will increase with increased damage, the main stalk of branched plants will be more damaged, and branching increases net seed production. Fifty populations of V. thapsus were extensively surveyed, and one pair of similar-sized individuals (branched vs. unbranched) were selected from each population to determine damage patterns and measure seed production. Two of the predictions of the reserve meristem hypothesis were clearly supported. The proportion of fruits damaged on the main stalk of branched plants was significantly greater than unbranched plants, and branched plants produced significantly more seeds. Hence, the reserve meristem hypothesis is supported as an adaptive interpretation of apical dominance in this species. This study is a potential example of overcompensation following granivory in the field.
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".