Differences in pollination syndromes and the frequency of autonomous delayed selfing between co-flowering <i>Hibiscus aponeurus</i> (Sprague and Hutch) and <i>H. flavifolius</i> (Ulbr) from Kenya
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Delayed autonomous selfing offers a mechanism for seed production when pollination levels are low or unpredictable. At Mpala Research Centre (MRC) in Kenya, we examined the relationships between floral attraction, insect visitation, and delayed autonomous selfing through backwards stylar curvature in the co-flowering Hibiscus aponeurus and H. flavifolius. Despite producing similar pollen and nectar rewards, visitation rates and the composition of floral visitor guilds varied significantly between these species. Across four years of observations, floral visitation in H. flavifolius was dominated by bees, and in H. aponeurus by a mixture of bees, butterflies and beetles. Visitation rates to H. flavifolius flowers (range 0.17 - 2.1 visits flr-1hr-1) were two times greater than to H. aponeurus flowers (range 0 - 2.7 visits flr-1hr-1), which resulted in significantly higher pollen deposition and removal rates in H. flavifolius than in H. aponeurus. Field crosses demonstrated little pollen limitation in either species. In open-pollinated flowers, H. aponeurus displayed significantly greater stylar curvature and apparent self-pollination than did H. flavifolius. Floral attributes in H. aponeurus, such as a smaller corolla size and a downwards orientation of the stylar column, also suggest that delayed selfing is a more important mechanism of reproductive assurance in this species than in H. flavifolius. Determining whether these differences in insect visitation and stylar curvature are characteristic for these species or are unique to MRC will require comparison with populations located in other parts of the ranges, genetic tests of selfing rates, and chemical analyses of nectar, pollen, and floral volatiles.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".