MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2559726584 · doi:10.26786/1920-7603(2016)5

Floral longevity, nectar production, pollen release, and stigma receptivity in Haskap (<i>Lonicera caerulea</i>)

2016· article· en· W2559726584 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Sandra Danae Frier, Christopher M. Somers, Cory S. Sheffield

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pollination Ecology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsRoyal Saskatchewan MuseumUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPollinatorBiologyAnthesisPollinationNectarPollenBotanyZoophilyHorticultureCultivar

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Haskap (Lonicera caerulea L.) is a temperate fruiting shrub grown commercially in northern regions of Europe, Asia, and North America. Haskap is self-incompatible and requires insect pollinators in order to set fruit; however, very little is currently known about its floral biology or pollinator specializations, particularly in North American cultivars. Here, we examine floral longevity, nectar dynamics, the timing of anther dehiscence, and stigma receptivity in flowers of greenhouse-grown ‘Tundra’, a Haskap cultivar developed and grown in Saskatchewan, Canada. Anthesis lasted 83.3 ± 25.9 hours (mean ± SD) in un-pollinated flowers; pollination caused early senescence within 34.3 ± 15.2 hours after pollination. Nectar was present from the onset of anthesis, and nectar volume peaked at 9-16 hours after opening. Nectar volume was maintained throughout anthesis and was not resorbed prior to abscission of the corolla from the ovary, and nectar removed during anthesis was replenished to the original volume. The stigma showed a reaction to hydrogen peroxide while still in the bud stage, suggesting it is receptive even before the flower opens. Early stigma receptivity, nectar production, and anther dehiscence maximize opportunities to be successfully pollinated, along with high floral longevity and pollination-triggered senescence. These results suggest that Haskap flowers utilize a generalist, rather than a specialized, pollination strategy. Observations that some flowers open in the evening or were already open in the morning suggest that nocturnal pollinators such as moths may be important, in addition to known diurnal pollinators.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.747
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations8
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pollination EcologySame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207