Floral Ontogeny and Allometry of <i>Mimulus cardinalis</i> : Interpopulational Variation and Traits of the Hummingbird‐Pollination Syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Investigations of floral ontogeny and allometry were used to determine the developmental origins of morphological variation among population samples of Mimulus cardinalis and the origins of floral characters that favor pollination by hummingbirds. Dimensions of structures in all whorls of the flowers differ among populations. Although the size and shapes of floral apices differ, the initiation sequence and enlargement of primordia and organogenesis are similar among populations. Interpopulational differences in calyx and corolla length result from distinct rates of growth and times of termination of growth. Stamen and style lengths vary among populations primarily because of different times of termination of growth. Inequalities in duration of growth explain variation in lengths of corolla tubes below the region of stamen insertion. Traits suited to hummingbird pollination, such as a longer upper wall of the corolla and the resulting oblique corolla aperture, are determined by different rates of growth between the upper and lower corolla walls. Upper and lower stamen pairs also grow at different rates. Other traits, such as a nectar gate between the basal ovarian nectary and bases of the lower filaments and stamens positioned in the upper medial region of the corolla, are caused by differential growth of regions of the filaments. Aspects of the ontogeny of M. cardinalis that influence morphological traits characteristic of the hummingbird‐pollination syndrome are related to published data on hummingbird pollination.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".