Different cost of reproduction for the males and females of the rare dioecious shrub <i>Corema conradii</i> (Empetraceae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Males and females of dioecious plant species often differ in their reproductive investment. Such differences frequently result in differential demographic costs represented by lower growth, survival, and/or frequency of reproduction, and/or by more variable reproductive effort through time for females. We present the results of a study on Corema conradii, a rare dioecious shrub of the coastal dune heathlands of northeastern North America. We estimated the reproductive investment of both males and females, determined their age structure, and compared their spatial patterns in a population at Îles-de-la-Madeleine, Quebec. We also determined the sex ratio of the four populations known to occur on the islands. Males invested more in reproduction at flowering, but when fruit production was considered, female reproductive investment was higher in terms of biomass, Mg, and Ca, but not in terms of N, P, and K. The age frequency distribution of males and females did not differ significantly from one another. The population dispersion pattern was contagious, with patches of similar-age individuals. There was no spatial segregation between males and females, although the sex ratio varied somewhat spatially. Females did not start reproducing at a later age than males and did not appear to have a shorter longevity. However, the crown and radial growth rates of females were lower than those of males. When estimated by the crown intercept method, the sex ratio of all four populations was male biased. However, because males had a higher crown growth rate, genet sex ratio was in fact balanced. Higher investment in reproduction was associated with a lower growth rate, which represents a differential cost of reproduction according to sex in this species.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".