Geographic variation in reproductive assurance of <i>Clarkia pulchella</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Climate can affect plant populations through direct effects on physiology and fitness, and through indirect effects on their relationships with pollinating mutualists. We therefore expect that geographic variation in climate might lead to variation in plant mating systems. Biogeographic processes, such as range expansion, can also contribute to geographic patterns in mating system traits. We manipulated pollinator access to plants in eight sites spanning the geographic range of Clarkia pulchella to investigate geographic and climatic drivers of fruit production and seed set in the absence of pollinators (reproductive assurance). We examined how reproductive assurance and fruit production varied with the position of sites within the range of the species and with temperature and precipitation. We found that reproductive assurance in C. pulchella was greatest in populations in the northern part of the species’ range, and was not well-explained by any of the climate variables that we considered. In the absence of pollinators, some populations of C. pulchella have the capacity to increase fruit production, perhaps through resource reallocation, but this response is climate-dependent. Pollinators are important for reproduction in this species, and recruitment is sensitive to seed input. The degree of autonomous self-pollination that is possible in populations of this mixed-mating species may be shaped by historic biogeographic processes or variation in plant and pollinator community composition rather than variation in climate.
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".