Pollination activity affects selection on floral longevity in the autumnal-flowering plant, <i>Narcissus serotinus</i> L.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Flower longevity, the period of time that a flower remains open, is a crucial factor in plant reproductive fitness. Though longevity varies substantially among angiosperm species, longer flower longevities may be a selective advantage under unpredictable or scarce pollination activity. This study examined this hypothesis in Narcissus serotinus L. (Amaryllidaceae), a small Mediterranean geophyte that blooms during the autumnal rainy season. Field experiments performed in three natural populations through 3 consecutive years shows that N. serotinus has the ability to expand flower longevity when pollination has not occurred. Flowers that were open longer to pollination have higher reproductive fitness than younger flowers. As N. serotinus flowers age, there was a shift in pollination patterns since flower visits by butterflies became scarcer and are replaced by one small pollen beetle. Given that there was evidence of pollen limitation and that this species produces one single flower, we suggest that extended flower longevity is selected because it assures pollination success under scarce insect visits.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".