The shape of the trade-off function between reproduction and future performance in<i>Plantago major</i>and<i>Plantago rugelii</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is a paucity of data describing the nature of the trade-off function between reproduction and future performance. Most studies implicitly assume it is a linear function such that allocation of resources to reproduction results in a proportional decline in future survival and reproduction. We reanalyse data from a field experiment with half-sib families of Plantago major L. that suggests this relationship is in fact curvilinear. Low levels of reproductive investment had relatively little impact on future performance and higher levels of investment had a larger impact. To explain this curvilinear pattern, we conducted an experiment to examine the effect of incremental increases in reproductive investment on rates of resource uptake in P. major and Plantago rugelii Decne. Results suggest that, because of differences in the resource requirements of vegetative versus reproductive tissues, reproduction will have little effect on growth, providing that the limiting resources are required in greater quantities for vegetative as compared with reproductive tissues. These results are in accord with a curvilinear trade-off function between reproduction and future performance and provide an explanation for the maintenance of sexual reproduction in species where seed production may contribute minimally to fitness in the short term.Key words: reproductive cost, resource allocation, life-history theory, nitrogen uptake, reproductive photosynthesis, Plantago major, Plantago rugelii.
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 | 0.001 | 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".