MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200511673 · doi:10.26786/1920-7603(2021)673

A functional view reveals substantial predictability of pollinator-mediated selection

2021· article· en· W4200511673 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pollination Ecology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersLunds Universitet
KeywordsPredictabilitySelection (genetic algorithm)TraitDisruptive selectionVariation (astronomy)BiologyPollinatorStabilizing selectionPollinationContext (archaeology)Natural selectionAdaptation (eye)EcologyEvolutionary biologyComputer scienceMachine learningStatisticsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A predictive understanding of adaptation to changing environments hinges on a mechanistic understanding of the extent and causes of variation in natural selection. Estimating variation in selection is difficult due to the complex relationships between phenotypic traits and fitness, and the uncertainty associated with individual selection estimates. Plant-pollinator interactions provide ideal systems for understanding variation in selection and its predictability, because both the selective agents (pollinators) and the process linking phenotypes to fitness (pollination) are generally known. Through examples from the pollination literature, I discuss how explicit consideration of the functional mechanisms underlying trait-performance relationships can clarify the relationship between traits and fitness, and how variation in the ecological context that generates selection can help disentangle biologically important variation in selection from sampling variation. I then evaluate the predictability of variation in pollinator-mediated selection through a survey, reanalysis, and synthesis of results from the literature. The synthesis demonstrates that pollinator-mediated selection often varies substantially among trait functional groups, as well as in time and space. Covariance between patterns of selection and ecological variables provides additional support for the biological importance of observed selection, but the detection of such covariance depends on careful choice of relevant predictor variables as well as consideration of quantitative measurements and their meaning, an aspect often neglected in selection studies.

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.

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)0.000
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 score0.579
Threshold uncertainty score0.923

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.194 · 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