Floral biology and pollination strategy of seven <i>Tacca</i> species (Taccaceae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigated the floral characteristics, floral biology and floral visitors of the six Bornean Tacca species: T. bibracteata (only floral characteristics), T. borneensis , T. havilandii , T. leontopetaloides , T. palmata and T. reducta , and T. cristata from Peninsular Malaysia. All species are protogynous with pollen strings extruded post flower opening. Blooming of all species started from dawn except for T. leontopetaloides which flowered from dusk. While T. borneensis , T. cristata , T. havilandii , T. leontopetaloides and T. reducta are facultatively autogamic as the pollen/ovule ratios (P/O ratios) were low, T. bibracteata is facultatively xenogamic as its P/O ratio was higher. Four species ( T. borneensis , T. cristata , T. havilandii and T. reducta ) were tested for autonomous self‐pollination but all failed to set fruit. Manual self‐ and cross‐pollination treatments of T. borneensis , T. cristata and T. havilandii showed reduced fruit set and seed set. In contrast, T. reducta was highly self‐compatible. The showy bracts and bracteoles of T. borneensis are needed to guarantee pollination success but is not so in the other species investigated. Tacca are pollinated by two pollination guilds of female midges: two species of Forcipomyia ( Lasiohelea ) and Culicoides hinnoi . The floral biology and mating system of Tacca species indicate that most fruits and seeds were produced in samples resulting from natural pollination.
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 | 0.001 | 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".