Comparative floral ecology of bicolor and concolor morphs of <i>Viola pedata</i> (Violaceae) following controlled burns
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We compared pollination and seed set of bicolor and concolor morphs in self-incompatible, Viola pedata over two seasons in two populations of unequal sizes. One population grew on a wooded slope (CR) and the second on an exposed glade (SNR). Both were burned in 2014. The number of flowers produced by concolor plants at SNR was higher in 2014 while the number of flowering bicolors increased at CR in 2015. Petal temperatures, regardless of site, showed that dark purple, posterior petals of bicolors were consistently warmer than their own mauve-lilac, anterior (lip) petals and the all mauve petals of concolors. Major pollen vectors were female bees (Andrenidae, Apidae and Halictidae) but polylectic, Andrena carlinii dominated both sites. Bees foraged on flowers upside down or right side up but neither mode correlated with either morph. Bees foraged preferentially on concolor at both sites. Pistils containing pollen tubes were higher in concolor pistils at both sites with a marginally greater number of tubes penetrating concolor ovules regardless of site or year. While both populations produced more seeds in 2014 SNR plants always produced more seeds than CR plants. The increasing numbers of bicolor plants at CR in 2015 suggested that bicolors may equal or outnumber concolors when dark petals offer additional warmth to ectothermic pollinators in a shady (cooler) forest vs. an open, sunny glade. Subtle environmental factors may give a floral trait a selective advantage influencing fitness in an unbalanced polymorphism persisting in localized populations.
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) | 0.001 | 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".