Reproductive biology of <i>Caryocar brasiliense</i> (Caryocaraceae) in preserved and degraded Cerrado areas in Brazil
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to characterize the reproductive system and determine the importance of pollinators for fruit production of Caryocar brasiliense, an economically important tree, in preserved and degraded Cerrado areas in southeastern Brazil. For this purpose, we performed pollinator exclusion experiments to determine the frequency of self- and cross-pollination, and to determine fruit set. In general, fruit set was extremely low; only 2.92% and 2.71% of the flowers developed into fruits in the degraded and preserved areas, respectively. Fruit sets by manual cross-pollination and natural (open) pollination were higher than self-pollination in both areas. Pollen deposition was significantly higher at night and in the preserved area, although a relatively high amount of pollen grains is found in the stigmas during the day. The number of ripened and aborted seeds did not differ among areas, but fruits and seeds were heavier in the degraded area than in the preserved area. The abortion level was very high (64.5%), which may be related to low pollen quality due to selfing. Our study presents evidence that Cerrado degradation affects the reproductive biology of C. brasiliense, but whether such effect is a consequence of pollinator decline in degraded areas remains to be determined.
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".