Geographic variation of reproductive traits and competition for pollinators in a bird‐pollinated plant
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Geographic variation in the reproductive traits of animal‐pollinated plants can be shaped by spatially variable selection imposed by differences in the local pollination environment. We investigated this process inBabiana ringens(Iridaceae), an enigmatic species from the Western Cape region of South Africa.B. ringenshas evolved a specialized perch facilitating cross‐pollination by sunbirds and displays striking geographic variation in perch size and floral traits. Here, we investigate whether this variation can be explained by geographic differences in the pollinator communities. We measured floral and inflorescence traits, and abiotic variables (N, P, C, and rainfall) and made observations of sunbirds in populations spanning the range ofB. ringens. In each population, we recorded sunbird species identity and measured visitation rates, interfloral pollen transfer, and whether the seed set of flowers was pollen limited. To evaluate whether competition from co‐occurring sunbird‐pollinated species might reduce visitation, we quantified nectar rewards inB. ringensand of other co‐flowering bird‐pollinated species in local communities in which populations occurred. Variation in abiotic variables was not associated with geographical variation of traits inB. ringens. Malachite sunbirds were the dominant visitor (97% of visits) and populations with larger‐sized traits exhibited higher visitation rates, more between‐flower pollen transfer and set more seed. No sunbirds were observed in four populations, all with smaller‐sized traits. Sunbird visitation toB. ringenswas not associated with local sunbird activity in communities, but sunbird visitation was negatively associated with the amount ofB. ringenssugar relative to the availability of alternative nectar sources. Our study provides evidence thatB. ringenspopulations with larger floral traits are visited more frequently by sunbirds, and we propose that visitation rates toB. ringensmay be influenced, in part, by competition with other sunbird‐pollinated species.
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) | 0.002 | 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".