Digest: The key to pollen-stigma dimorphisms-Dissecting the functional significance of the heterostylous syndrome*
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Heterostyly is a genetic polymorphism that has evolved in at least 28 different flowering plant families and represents one of the best examples of convergent evolution in floral form. Heterostylous populations are comprised of floral morphs that differ in the reciprocal positioning of sex organs. The presence of these forms leads to pollen segregation on different regions of the animal pollinator's body, consequently promoting disassortative mating (between morphs) and reducing pollen wastage. Evolutionary biologists have been interested in this phenomenon since Darwin's seminal work on distylous Primula vulgaris, where he described both pin (high stigma, low anthers) and thrum (high anthers, low stigma) floral morphs and provided the first adaptive hypothesis for the function of heterostyly (Darwin 1877). However, heterostyly is more than just a morphological adaptation; the heterostylous syndrome is characterized additionally by genetic self-incompatibility, and by a suite of ancillary structural and biochemical pollen–stigma polymorphisms (Dulberger 1992). The evolutionary significance of self-incompatibility and morphological components of the syndrome, and the sequence by which they have been assembled, has been continuously debated, leading to a large literature on the subject (reviewed in Barrett and Shore 2008). Still, a particular gap in our understanding concerns the functional significance of a more overlooked component of the heterostylous syndrome—ancillary pollen–stigma polymorphisms.
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 | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.022 | 0.024 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
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".