Differentiation of mating system, life history and floral traits in annual and perennial populations of an insect-pollinated plant
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Theory predicts that selfing should be more prevalent among annuals than perennials, a pattern confirmed by comparative evidence. Yet, intraspecific comparisons between annual and perennial populations are few because such variation is rare among flowering plants. Here, we investigate relations between mating systems and life-history traits between annual and perennial plants of Incarvillea sinensis, a wide-ranging insect-pollinated herb native to China. We estimated outcrossing rates and biparental inbreeding in 16 allopatric and five sympatric populations in which both life histories co-existed using 20 microsatellite loci. In each population we measured plant height, branch number, corolla size, tube length and herkogamy for ~30 individuals. In a sympatric population, we recorded daily flower number, pollinator visitation and collected data on fruit and seed set of annual and perennial plants. As predicted, outcrossing rates (t) were considerably higher in perennial (mean = 0.76) than annual (mean = 0.09) populations, with the degree of herkogamy consistently larger in outcrossing populations. Perennial populations were more branched with more flowers which were larger in size than in annual populations. In sympatric populations, annuals had significantly higher fruit and seed set than perennials. Differences in herkogamy between annual and perennial plant likely play a key role in governing outcrossing rates. The maintenance of mating system and life-history trait differentiation in I. sinensis probably results from correlated evolution in response to local environmental conditions.
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 | 0.001 | 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".