Bibliographic record
Abstract
Semelparity-the life history featuring a single, massive bout of reproduction followed by death-has been traditionally considered as a discrete trait, and mathematical models that compare the intrinsic rates of increase between annual semelparity and perennial iteroparity are often used to explain why organisms have semelparous or iteroparous reproductive strategies.However, some authors have proposed that semelparity and iteroparity may represent different extremes along a continuum of possible modes of parity, rather than discrete alternatives.In this thesis, I provide experimental evidence for this "continuum" hypothesis by assessing the degree of variation in the simultaneity and uniformity of semelparous reproduction in the semelparous herb Lobelia inflata (Campanulaceae).I report four points of interest: (1) that reproductive characters can strategically vary among offspring within a semelparous reproductive episode; (2) that phenotypically plastic responses to constrained reproduction cause variation in the "semelparousness" of a semelparous reproductive episode; (3) that L. inflata is capable of deferring reproductive effort to another season, and that this deferral is also phenotypically plastic; and (4) that the degree of genetic variation in a field population of L. inflata suggests non-random survival of ecotypes related to differences in parity.I conclude that the continuum hypothesis more accurately characterizes life history variation among semelparous organisms.
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 | 0.007 | 0.059 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.001 |
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".