Increased reliance on diurnal pollination in a geographically and morphologically atypical sand verbena
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Premise—Pollinator-mediated selection drives floral morphologies to converge on sets of traits deemed “pollination syndromes”. As a result of similarity due to common descent, pollination syndromes can be shared among closely related plants in cases where pollinators remain relatively constant over evolutionary time. In these cases, species that display trait deviations away from their ancestral states may indicate hidden pollinator shifts. Identifying when and where trait deviations reflect reproductive contributions from unexpected pollinators is important for understanding the boundaries and cohesion of pollination syndrome phenotypes. Methods—The floral morphology of heart’s delight, Abronia ameliae, unites a collection of traditional moth-pollination syndrome traits, typical for the genus, with several characters odd for moth pollination, including diurnally open, pink flowers and large, tall inflorescences. We predicted that the evolution of this combination of traits reflects a change in pollinators from other Abronia, specifically that this species is primarily diurnally-pollinated. We conducted pollinator-exclusion experiments in a natural population and a common garden to determine the independent reproductive contributions of diurnal and nocturnal pollinators to A. ameliae and characterized its volatile profile. Results—We found that A. ameliae is indeed primarily diurnally pollinated: visitation by day-active butterflies and moths contributed to higher seed set than visitation by nocturnal moths. However, A. ameliae also emits nocturnal moth-associated volatile compounds and receives considerable nocturnal pollination. Conclusions—We suggest that the unusual phenotypes found in A. ameliae flowers relative to the genus reflect a shift in reproductive contributions to incorporate mostly diurnal pollination and transition to a mixed pollination strategy that blends diurnal and nocturnal pollination phenotypes.
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".