MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2794478328 · doi:10.26786/1920-7603(2018)seven

Aggregate enantiostyly: Floral visitor interactions with a previously unreported form of floral display

2018· article· en· W2794478328 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sarah K. Richman, D. Lawrence Venable

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pollination Ecology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOutcrossingBiologySelfingPollinatorPollenMating systemBotanyPollinationMatingEvolutionary biologyEcologyPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Floral herkogamy, or the spatial separation of reproductive structures, plays an important role in the evolution of plant mating systems. One form of herkogamy is enantiostyly, or the alternate presentation of stigmas to the left and right of the floral axis. Theoretically, enantiostyly increases outcrossing rate by promoting reciprocal pollen deposition and export, but empirical evidence of this is lacking. Understanding how pollinators interact with enantiostylous flowers will illuminate the mechanisms by which enantiostyly encourages outcross pollination. We quantified style deployment within and among plants, of Allionia incarnata L. (Nyctaginaceae), a species with a new kind of enantiostyly we call “aggregate enantiostyly”. A. incarnata is the first species known to have “compound blossoms”, with different flowers each containing a left- or right-handed style. We quantify the autonomous selfing rate and describe floral visitor interactions with this unique floral structure. We found equal frequency of left- and right-handed blossoms within and among plants. Common floral visitors, Hemiargus ceraunus and Halictus sp., interacted with either anthers or stigmas, but not both, indicating effective outcrossing at the flower level. Outcrossing produced more fruits than selfing. The order in which floral visitors interacted with reproductive structures indicates that enantiostyly may increase pollen export. However, we did not find evidence that enantiostyly affected pollen deposition. Our study provides an intriguing first look at the reproductive ecology of a species with a new unique form of herkogamy, and provides evidence on the adaptive significance of enantiostyly.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.371
Threshold uncertainty score0.338

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Citations6
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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