MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2993943022 · doi:10.18357/tar101201918921

Floral Longevity and Attraction of Arctic Lupine, Lupinus arcticus: Implications for Pollination Efficiency

2019· article· en· W2993943022 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Arbutus Review · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPollinatorBiologyPollinationPollenPollen sourceLongevityNectarZoophilyBotanyPetalAttraction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pollination by insects is a mutualistic relationship in which flowers receive pollen for reproduction while pollinators are rewarded with pollen or nectar. Floral longevity (the period an individual flower blooms) and floral attraction (the period during which pollinators are attracted to the flower, often indicated by petal colour) both play prominent roles in plant and pollinator success. This study investigated whether floral longevity and floral attraction were mediated by pollination type in arctic lupine (Lupinus arcticus S. Wats.), a common herbaceous perennial in northwestern North America. Flowers were either open to pollinators, cross-pollinated by hand, or bagged to prevent cross-pollination, and floral longevity, seed set, and flower colour were observed. Open and hand-pollinated flowers had significantly shorter floral longevities and higher percent fruit sets than bagged flowers. A colour change of the banner petal marking from white to pink occurred in some flowers and was a signal of floral attraction, as pollinators preferentially visited pre-change flowers. Pre-change flowers contained more pollen and were less likely to have been injured by herbivory than post-change flowers, yet the colour change was not related to pollination type or fruit set. Pollination-induced shortening of floral longevity is likely an adaptation to limited plant resources and pollinator visitation rates. For L. arcticus, this could be influenced by short growing seasons and low annual temperatures in the study area. In the face of climatic changes and shifting species phenologies, the mediation of floral longevity by pollinators could decrease temporal mismatch between plants and their pollinators, yet the many factors at play make this difficult to accurately predict.

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.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.782
Threshold uncertainty score0.100

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.208 · 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