Pollen limitation and reduced reproductive success are associated with local genetic effects in Prunus virginiana, a widely distributed self-incompatible shrub
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: A vast quantity of empirical evidence suggests that insufficient quantity or quality of pollen may lead to a reduction in fruit set, in particular for self-incompatible species. This study uses an integrative approach that combines field research with marker gene analysis to understand the factors affecting reproductive success in a widely distributed self-incompatible species, Prunus virginiana (Rosaceae). METHODS: Twelve patches of P. virginiana distributed within three populations that differed in degree of disturbance were examined. Two of the sites were small (7-35 km(2)) remnants of forest in an intensively used agricultural landscape, while the third was continuous (350 km(2)) and less disturbed. Field studies (natural and hand cross-pollinations) were combined with marker gene analyses (microsatellites and S-locus) in order to explore potential factors affecting pollen delivery and consequently reproductive success at landscape (between populations) and fine scales (within populations). KEY RESULTS: Reductions in reproductive output were found in the two fragments compared with the continuous population, and suggest that pollen is an important factor limiting fruit production. Genetic analyses carried out in one of the fragments and in the continuous site suggest that even though S-allele diversity is high in both populations, the fragment exhibits an increase in biparental inbreeding and correlated paternity. The increase in biparental inbreeding in the fragment is potentially attributable to variation in the density of individuals and/or the spatial distribution of genotypes among populations, both of which could alter mating dynamics. CONCLUSIONS: By using a novel integrative approach, this study shows that even though P. virginiana is a widespread species, fragmented populations can experience significant reductions in fruit set and pollen limitation in the field. Deatiled examination of one fragmented population suggests that these linitations may be explained by an increase in biparental inbreeding, correlated paternity and fine-scale genetic structure. The consistency of the field and fine-scale genetic analyses, and the consistency of the results within patches and across years, suggest that these are important processes driving pollen limitation in the fragment.
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".