Sex Allocation and Reproductive Success in the Andromonoecious Perennial Solanum carolinense (Solanaceae). II. Paternity and Functional Gender
Bibliographic record
Abstract
According to Bateman's principle, male fitness in entomophilous plant species should be limited by mating opportunity, which is influenced by the size or number of flowers. We determined male‐specific fitness consequences of floral phenotype in andromonoecious Solanum carolinense, examined the relationship between male and female reproductive success within plants, and evaluated the distribution of functional gender among plants. A maximum likelihood‐based paternity analysis, based on multilocus allozyme phenotypes of parents and offspring from four experimental plots, was used to determine male reproductive success and its relationship to floral phenotype. Male success was enhanced by an increase in the proportion of male flowers produced but not by an increase in total flower number, even though all flowers contain male parts. Larger flower size increased male success in only one plot. Male and female reproductive success were negatively correlated, and plants varied in functional gender from completely female to completely male. This gender specialization may occur because hermaphroditic and male flowers differ in their ability to contribute to male and female success. Although sex allocation theory predicts a positive relationship between the size or number of plant parts and reproductive success, this study indicates that aspects of floral morphology that affect gender specialization should also be considered.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".