Testing for pollinator recognition in multiple species of <i>Heliconia</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Many plants have evolved floral traits that, in effect, filter pollinator communities and promote pollination by efficient pollinators. Most documented pollinator filter traits act to deter or reduce visitation rates by a subsect of the community of floral visitors. However, a recently described pollinator filter termed ‘pollinator recognition’ (PR) acts at a stage after a pollinator visit. PR was first documented experimentally in Heliconia tortuosa whereby pollen tube germination – a proxy for reproduction – was enhanced following visits from morphologically specialized pollinators, but not generalists. This is thought to promote outcrossing among plants by preferentially investing in reproduction following visits by long-ranging hummingbirds with specialized bill shapes. To date, this plant behavior has only been described in H. tortuosa , but, if widespread, could have important ecological implications; given declines in abundances of specialist pollinators, visits by generalists would not buffer the loss of pollination services to plants with PR. We therefore tested for PR in four taxa spread widely across the Heliconiaceae. We corroborated previous results that visits by long-billed, but not short-billed hummingbirds increased pollen tubes in H. tortuosa with aviary experiments that standardized pollen quality and minimized variation in pollen quantity. Across species, we found great variation in pollen tube responses to experimental treatments. For one species ( H. rostrata ), we found increased numbers of pollen tubes in those visited by hummingbirds compared to hand pollination alone, regardless of the visiting bird’s bill morphology, indicating recognition of hummingbirds in general. In other cases, hummingbird visits decreased pollen tube counts compared to hand pollinations alone. Furthermore, our results could not substantiate any specific mechanism for pollinator recognition and highlight the need for further work on the complexities of and variability in reproductive strategies across plant taxa.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".