MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4377046917 · doi:10.1002/ajb2.16179

Pollinator visitation closely tracks diurnal patterns in pollen release

2023· article· en· W4377046917 on OpenAlexaff
Jakub Štenc, Lukáš Janošík, Eva Matoušková, Jiří Hadrava, Michael Mikát, Zdeněk Janovský

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Botany · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsYork University
FundersUniverzita Karlova v Praze
KeywordsPollenPollinatorBiologyPollinationPollen sourceZoophilyBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PREMISE: Animal-pollinated plants face a high risk of pollen loss during its transfer. To limit the negative effect of pollen losses by pollen consumption and heterospecific transfer, plant species may adjust and stratify their pollen availability during the day (i.e., "schedule" their pollen presentation) and attract pollinators in specific time frames. METHODS: We investigated diurnal patterns of pollen availability and pollinator visitation in three coflowering plant species: Succisa pratensis with open flowers and accessible pollen, pollinated mainly by pollen-feeding hoverflies; Centaurea jacea with open flowers and less accessible pollen, pollinated mainly by pollen-collecting bees; and Trifolium hybridum with closed flowers and pollen accessible only after the active opening of the flower, pollinated exclusively by bees. RESULTS: The three plant species differed in the peak pollen availability, tracked by the visitation activity of their pollinators. Succisa pratensis released all pollen in the morning, while pollinator activity was still low and peaked with a slight delay. In contrast, C. jacea and T. hybridum had distinct pollen presentation schedules, peaking in the early afternoon. The pollinator visitation to both of these species closely matched their pollen availability. CONCLUSIONS: Stratifying pollen availability to pollinators during the day may be one of several mechanisms that allow coflowering plants to share their pollinators and decrease the probability of heterospecific pollen transfer.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.547
Threshold uncertainty score0.137

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.208 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of BotanySame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207