MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3184003048 · doi:10.26786/1920-7603(2021)624

Pollination of <i>Nypa fruticans</i> (Wurmb.) in a South Florida botanic garden

2021· article· en· W3184003048 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Imeña Valdes, Joanna M. Tucker Lima, Larry R. Noblick

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pollination Ecology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPollinationPollinatorBiologyZoophilyHand-pollinationNative plantBotanyEcologyIntroduced speciesPollen

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When plants are removed from their native habitat, reproduction can be compromised if pollinators are absent, especially when plant-pollinator interactions are species-specific and the plant is self-incompatible. To avoid these pitfalls, botanic gardens often use hand pollination to ensure reproductive success of their living collections, an important aspect of ex-situ conservation. The nipa palm, Nypa fruticans, presents an interesting case study of pollination in a botanic garden and a plant’s ability to successfully reproduce outside its native range without assisted pollination. Nypa fruticans has been growing at Montgomery Botanical Center (MBC) in South Florida since 1984, but for years required hand pollination to produce viable fruit. A recent shift from hand pollination to unassisted pollination suggests that this palm has found an alternative to fertilize its flowers. We investigate possible pollinators and new opportunities for pollination outside the palm’s native range. Rather than the insects typically associated with N. fruticans pollination in its native range in Southeast Asia (i.e., flies and beetles), ants, specifically Paratrechina longicornis, were overwhelmingly the most abundant visitors to nipa palm inflorescences at MBC and likely represent an important pollinator or facilitator of pollination at the garden. Pollination research at botanic gardens complements in-situ field studies and provides important insights into the flexibility of pollination systems to achieve reproductive success outside a plant’s native range.

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 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)0.001
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 score0.911
Threshold uncertainty score0.497

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Pollination EcologySame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207