A MODEL OF THE EVOLUTION OF DICHOGAMY INCORPORATING SEX‐RATIO SELECTION, ANTHER‐STIGMA INTERFERENCE, AND INBREEDING DEPRESSION
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Historically, explanations for the evolution of floral traits that reduce self-fertilization have tended to focus on selection to avoid inbreeding depression. However, there is growing support for the hypothesis that such traits also play a role in promoting efficient pollen dispersal by reducing anther-stigma interference. The relative importance of these two selective pressures is currently a popular topic of investigation. To date, there has been no theoretical exploration of the relative contributions of selection to avoid the genetic costs of self-fertilization and selection to promote efficient pollen dispersal on the evolution of floral traits. We developed a population genetic model to examine the influence of these factors on the evolution of dichogamy: the temporal separation of anther maturation and stigma receptivity. Our analysis indicates that anther-stigma interference can favor dichogamy even in the absence of in-breeding depression. Although anther-stigma interference and inbreeding depression are the key forces driving the initial evolution of dichogamy, selection to match the timing of pollen dispersal to the availability of ovules at the population level becomes a more potent force opposing the further evolution of dichogamy as the extent of temporal separation increases. This result may help to explain otherwise puzzling phenomena such as why dichogamy is rarely complete in nature and why dichogamy tends to be associated with asynchronous flower presentation.
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".