MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2213698274 · doi:10.26786/1920-7603(2011)16

Pollination and reproductive biology of thirteen species of <i>Begonia</i> in the Serra do Mar State Park, São Paulo, Brazil

2011· article· en· W2213698274 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Graham E. Wyatt, Marlies Sazima

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pollination Ecology · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant and Fungal Species Descriptions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyBegoniaHalictidaePollenPollinatorBotanyStamenPollinationAnthesisNectarOvuleApoideaHymenopteraCultivar

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The reproductive biology of 13 monoecious species of Begonia that occur in the Serra do Mar State Park, São Paulo, Brazil, was investigated. These species flower annually and present flowers with mostly white tepals, sweet odour, pollen as a reward but no nectar, numerous yellow stamens, and yellow styles. Anthesis is diurnal and floral duration is long (6 - 15 days). The unusual appearance of pistillate flowers of these species supports the view that they are intersexual mimics of the staminate flowers. Despite consistently high levels of fruit-set, none of the 11 species tested proved to be apomictic. In contrast to earlier reports of self-compatibility in Begonia, self-pollinations of B. integerrima and B. itatinensis produced no fruits or seeds, and the complete absence of pollen tubes in the styles of self-pollinated flowers of B. integerrima suggests that the species is self-incompatible. Flowers pollinated under natural conditions showed many pollen tubes that reached ovules, suggesting that adequate numbers of compatible pollen grains had been transported by pollinators. The principal pollinators were bees of the Apidae and Halictidae. Ten species of bees were observed to visit eight species of Begonia, and pollen collection occurred by vibration, except for Trigona spinipes. Visits to rewarding staminate flowers were significantly more frequent than visits to unrewarding pistillate flowers. Duration of visits to pistillate flowers also was significantly shorter than the duration of visits to staminate flowers. We conclude that visits to pistillate flowers occur by mistake but with sufficient frequency to allow for successful reproduction in natural populations of these species.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.223 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations18
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pollination EcologySame topicPlant and Fungal Species DescriptionsFrench-language works237,207