Floral variation and environmental heterogeneity in a tristylous clonal aquatic of the Pantanal wetlands of Brazil
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The balance between stochastic forces and frequency-dependent mating largely governs style morph frequencies in heterostylous populations. In clonal species, deviations from equal morph ratios often result from founder events and unfavourable conditions for sexual reproduction. The aim of this study was to investigate whether different flooding regimes, because of their influence on sexual vs. clonal reproduction, are associated with regional variation in morph frequencies and floral trait differentiation in populations of the clonal, tristylous, aquatic Eichhornia azurea (Pontederiaceae) in the Pantanal wetlands of Brazil. METHODS: Style morph frequencies were sampled from 73 populations distributed across four flooding regimes differing in depth and duration. Measurements of flower size, sex-organ dimension, pollen size and pollen production were made in selected populations, and pollinator assemblages and their functional traits were recorded. KEY RESULTS: Most populations of E. azurea were tristylous (78 %), but the majority exhibited uneven morph ratios. The frequency of the mid-styled morph was significantly lower than that of the long- and short-styled morphs. Morph evenness was positively associated with population size but not with flooding regime. There were significant phenotypic differences among flooding regimes for all floral traits, including populations with reduced flower size, sex-organ length and smaller pollen. Pollinator assemblages varied with flood duration. CONCLUSIONS: The similar morph structure and evenness of populations, regardless of flooding regime, suggest that sexual reproduction and clonal dispersal are sufficiently common to prevent the signature of founder events from dominating in a region. However, the pervasive occurrence of biased morph ratios in most populations suggests that many are in a non-equilibrium state. The reduced frequency of the mid-styled morph in trimorphic and dimorphic populations may be associated with the weak self-incompatibility of this morph resulting in selfing and inbreeding depression. Clonality in E. azurea and the weak self-incompatibility of the mid-styled morph may make it more vulnerable to geitonogamous selfing.
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".