MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Maternal effects and heterosis influence the fitness of plant hybrids

2005· article· en· W2160125376 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Heather Kirk, Klaas Vrieling, Peter G. L. Klinkhamer

Bibliographic record

VenueNew Phytologist · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsHybridHeterosisBiologySenecioOffspringEcologyAgronomyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Here we tested two possible nonexclusive explanations for the maintenance of a hybrid swarm between Senecio jacobaea and Senecio aquaticus; first, that genotype-by-environment interactions involving water and nutrient clines are involved in hybrid fitness, and second, heterosis in early hybrid generations may provide an initial hybrid advantage that contributes to hybrid persistence. In three climate chamber studies, fitness and root growth were measured for parental species and natural and artificial F1 hybrids, in order to determine whether hybrids occur in habitats where they are more fit than parental species. Natural hybrids, which are generally back-crossed to S. jacobaea, always equaled S. jacobaea in growth characteristics. Maternal effects played a role in the fitness of F1 hybrids, with offspring from S. jacobaea mothers exhibiting higher fitness than those from S. aquaticus mothers, and compared with parental species and natural hybrids. Natural hybrids are not distributed in zones where they are most fit with respect to nutrient and water regimes. Superior fitness of early generation hybrids may contribute to hybrid swarm stability.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.280
Threshold uncertainty score0.125

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.189 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations50
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNew PhytologistSame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207