The Ecology of Mating and Its Evolutionary Consequences in Seed Plants
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mating in seed plants arises from interactions between plant traits and the environmental and demographic context in which individuals reside. These interactions commonly cause nonrandom mating, including selfing and promiscuous outcrossing within local neighborhoods. Shared features of seed plants, specifically immobility, hermaphroditism, and modularity, shape the essential character of mating mediated by animals, wind, and water. In addition, diverse floral strategies promote cross- and self-mating, depending on environmental circumstances. Extrinsic ecological factors influence all stages of the mating process—pollination, pollen-tube growth, ovule fertilization—as well as seed development, determining offspring quantity and quality. Traditionally, measures of plant mating systems have focused on a single axis of variation, the maternal outcrossing rate. Instead, we argue for an expanded perspective encompassing mating portfolios, which include all offspring to which individuals contribute genetically as maternal or paternal parents. This approach should expose key ecological determinants of mating-system variation and their evolutionary consequences.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 it