Enhancing pollination of the endangered western prairie fringed orchid (Platanthera praeclara) by sphinx moths (Lepidoptera: Sphingidae) in tall grass prairie in southeastern Manitoba and an examination of orchid nectar production
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The endangered western prairie fringed orchid, Platanthera praeclara (Sheviak and Bowles), is found in remnant tall grass prairie in southeastern Manitoba, and has a lower level of seed capsule development in comparison to more southern populations in the United States. Pollination of P. praeclara is limited to few select species of sphinx moths, Sphingidae, Lepidoptera, a group that is less abundant in comparison to other lepidopteran families. This study tested the hypothesis that the presence of ultraviolet light sources near orchids would attract more sphinx moths into orchid habitat and increase feeding activity of sphinx moth pollinators, thus increasing seed capsule production. The second part of this study measured orchid nectar quality and quantity during the bloom period and the possible link to pollination success. A significantly larger number of individual flowers and plants developed seed capsules in the ultraviolet light treatment plots (5.13+-0.42% of available flowers; 35.12+-1.74% of total plants) than the control plots (2.78 +- 0.42% of available flowers; 21.76 +- 2.58% of total plants). The intensity of the ultraviolet light treatment may have also had an effect on pollination success. Ultraviolet lights influenced seed capsule production by attracting sphinx moths into experimental plots. Results also indicated that ultraviolet light may be useful to manipulate seed capsule production for other research purposes. Nectar quality and quantity varied considerably during the study. The mean sugar concentration over the sampling season was 23.9+-0.2%; however, values ranged from a low 13% to high of 34%. Nectar sugar concentration decreased by approximately 6% as the flowering period progressed over the season. % of total plants) than the control plots (2.7g + 0.42 %o of available flowers; 2l .7 6 + 2.58 %o of total plants). The intensity of the ultraviolet light treatment may have also had an effect on pollination success.
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".