Regional effects and local climate jointly shape the global distribution of sexual systems in woody flowering plants
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Understanding the evolution and maintenance of plant sexual diversity needs to incorporate both regional processes and local climate factors across large geographic scales. Using data of woody flowering plants from a global set of large-scale forest plots and multinomial logistic regression, we quantified regional effects on the proportions of dioecious, monoecious, and hermaphroditic species and their abundance while incorporating evolutionary history and local climate factors. Our results showed that plants were more likely to be dioecious than hermaphroditic in Oceania and tropical Asia but were more likely to be monoecious than dioecious in Europe and North America compared with tropical Africa. We further found that plants were more likely to be monoecious than dioecious in island communities. Plants were more likely to be monoecious than dioecious in areas with high precipitation but were more likely to be dioecious than monoecious in areas with high precipitation of coldest quarter. Our results suggest that both regional processes and local climate factors play important roles in shaping the geographic distribution of plant sexual systems, providing a baseline for predicting future changes in forest communities in the context of global change.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".