Patterns of pollen dispersal and mating in a population of the clonal plant <i>Sagittaria latifolia</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Increased plant size is generally expected to have negative consequences for mating by increasing pollen transfer between flowers of the same plant. Such geitonogamous self‐pollination would then reduce sexual fitness through both female and male function. However, recent theoretical work has indicated that when plants grow clonally, the outward expansion of plants caused by clonal growth might have positive effects on siring without substantially increasing rates of self‐pollination. We investigated patterns of pollen dispersal, selfing and siring in a monoecious population of the clonal plant Sagittaria latifolia , in which clones varied in size and the extent of intermingling with other clones. A spatially explicit statistical model based on the inferred pollen dispersal kernel was constructed to examine the mechanisms underlying observed mating patterns. Pollen dispersal typically occurred over distances that exceeded the spatial extent of clones. There was a positive association between clone size (measured as the number of ramets per genet) and the likelihood that clones were intermingled with the shoots of other clones. Together, these patterns of pollen dispersal and clonal intermingling resulted in a weak positive association between clone size and selfing rates and a strong positive association between clone size and outcross siring success. These patterns were replicated in the spatially explicit model, indicating that the intermingling of clones is an important determinant of mating patterns in this population. Synthesis . Our study provides the first examination of the pollen dispersal kernel for a clonal plant. It is the first study providing empirical support for model predictions that potentially negative effects of increased selfing in large clones might be offset by increased siring success. This implies that the negative consequences of becoming large do not necessarily apply to clonal plants.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".