MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2973241978 · doi:10.1098/rspb.2019.0955

Effects of neighbour location and nutrient distributions on root foraging behaviour of the common sunflower

2019· article· en· W2973241978 on OpenAlexafffund
Megan K. Ljubotina, James F. Cahill

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSunflower and Safflower Cultivation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsForagingSunflowerNutrientBiologyRoot (linguistics)EcologyAgronomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Plants regularly encounter patchily distributed soil nutrients. A common foraging response is to proliferate roots within high-quality patches. The influence of the social environment on this behaviour has been given limited attention, despite important fitness consequences of competition for soil resources among plants. Using the common sunflower (Helianthus annuusL.), we compared localized root proliferation in a high-quality patch by plants grown alone to that of plants in two different social environments: with a neighbouring plant sharing equal access to the high-quality patch, and with a neighbouring plant present but farther from the high-quality patch such that the focal individual was in closer proximity to the high-quality patch. Sunflowers grown alone proliferated more roots within high-nutrient patches than lower-nutrient soil. Plants decreased root proliferation within a high-nutrient patch when it was equidistant to a neighbour. Conversely, plants increased root proliferation when they were in closer proximity to the patch relative to a nearby neighbour. Such contingent responses may allow sunflowers to avoid competition in highly contested patches, but to also pre-empt soil resources from neighbours when they have better access to a high-quality patch. We also compared patch occupancy by sunflowers grown alone with two equidistant high-quality patches to occupancy by sunflowers grown with two high-quality patches and a neighbour. Plants grown with a neighbour decreased root length within shared patches but did not increase root length within high-quality patches they were in closer proximity to, perhaps because resource pre-emption may be less important for individuals when resources are more abundant. These results show that nutrient foraging responses in plants can be socially contingent, and that plants may account for the possibility of pre-empting limited resources in their foraging decisions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations35
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Royal Society B Biological SciencesSame topicSunflower and Safflower CultivationFrench-language works237,207