Mating and fitness consequences of variation in male allocation in a wind‐pollinated plant
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In hermaphrodites, the allocation of resources to each sex function can influence fitness through mating success. A prediction that arises from sex allocation theory is that in wind-pollinated plants, male fitness should increase linearly with investment of resources into male function but there have been few empirical tests of this prediction. In a field experiment, we experimentally manipulated allocation to male function in Ambrosia artemisiifolia (common ragweed) and measured mating success in contrasting phenotypes using genetic markers. We investigated the effects of morphological traits and flowering phenology on male siring success, and on the diversity of mates. Our results provide evidence for a linear relation between allocation to male function, mating, and fitness. We find earlier onset of male flowering time increases reproductive success, whereas later flowering increases the probability of mating with diverse individuals. Our study is among the first empirical tests of the prediction of linear male fitness returns in wind-pollinated plants and emphasizes the importance of a large investment into male function by wind-pollinated plants and mating consequences of temporal variation in sex allocation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".