Constrained lability in floral evolution: counting convergent origins of hummingbird pollination in <i>Penstemon</i> and <i>Keckiella</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the clade of Penstemon and segregate genera, pollination syndromes are well defined among the 284 species. Most display combinations of floral characters associated with pollination by Hymenoptera, the ancestral mode of pollination for this clade. Forty-one species present characters associated with hummingbird pollination, although some of these ornithophiles are also visited by insects. The ornithophiles are scattered throughout the traditional taxonomy and across phylogenies estimated from nuclear (internal transcribed spacer (ITS)) and chloroplast DNA (trnCD/TL) sequence data. Here, the number of separate origins of ornithophily is estimated, using bootstrap phylogenies and constrained parsimony searches. Analyses suggest 21 separate origins, with overwhelming support for 10 of these. Because species sampling was incomplete, this is probably an underestimate. Penstemons therefore show great evolutionary lability with respect to acquiring hummingbird pollination; this syndrome acts as an attractor to which species with large sympetalous nectar-rich flowers have frequently been drawn. By contrast, penstemons have not undergone evolutionary shifts backwards or to other pollination syndromes. Thus, they are an example of both striking evolutionary lability and constrained evolution.
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".