Pace and shape of senescence in three species of duckweed
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Senescence is progressive bodily deterioration associated with declines in survival and fecundity in older age classes. There is great diversity in patterns of senescence across species, but these patterns can be difficult to compare formally due to variation in the absolute time scales in which species live and die: members of some species live for a matter of days, others for millennia. To address this issue, the “pace‐shape” approach was developed to decouple absolute time from analyses and instead standardize life history traits in terms of average life expectancy, facilitating intra‐ and interspecific comparisons. Here, we use this approach to distinguish the generic form of demographic trajectories (shape) from the time scale on which the trajectories occurred (pace) in three species of tiny, free‐floating aquatic plants known as duckweeds ( Lemna gibba L., L. minor L., and L. turionifera Landolt), which have mean lifespans of less than a month under typical lab conditions, and exhibit age‐related declines in survivorship and reproduction. Using a randomized block design in which we tracked a final total of 430 individuals, we report differences in pace and shape among the three species. Specifically, the largest, least‐fecund, and typically longest‐lived species, L. gibba , tended to exhibit more rapid decreases in time‐standardized survivorship and fecundity compared with the other two species. This study emphasizes variation in aging patterns that can be found among plant species, including those in the same genus, and provides further validation for the utility of applying the pace and shape approach in interspecific comparisons.
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) | 0.001 | 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 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".