Pollination biology of Polygala alba nutt (Polygalaceae) /
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Faegri and van der Pijl (1966) have described pollination mechanisms in certain European and Indian species.The approach of many early studies, as Fryxell (1957) pointed out, was that of floral mechanisms and structural adaptation rather than experimental.Cleistogamy, an obvious mechanism leading to autogamy, is well known in several species in the genus (Knuth, 1904; Shaw, 1904; James, 1957).Miller (1971) and Gillett (1968) have proposed other possible mechanisms for self-pollination in the absence of out-crossing but agree that careful field observations are needed.The present study was designed to investigate the relationship of floral morphology, phenology, ecological conditions, and insect behavior to pollination and breeding systems in the genus Polyg a l a .Polygala a l b a , a long-lived perennial of the central and southwestern United States and adjacent Canada and Mexico, was selected for study because of its local abundance, diverse ecology, extensive distribu tion, and morphological similarity to many other species.CHAPTER II MATERIALS AN D METHODS Observations on P. alba were made in the field and on greenhouse-grown plants.The field studies were con ducted on eleven populations in Texas and Oklahoma (Table 1) representing a diversity of ecological conditions.Herbar ium vouchers of P. alba, as well as associated species in each of the study areas, have been deposited in the Bebb Herbarium of the University of Oklahoma.Fresh, dried, and preserved flowers were examined under dissecting and compound microscopes and the morphologi cal structures related to pollination (Baker and Hurd, 1968; Faegri and van der Pijl, 1966; Percival, 1962; and Beattie, 1969a)were noted.Flowers were preserved in two solutionsmodified Carnoys and a 9:1 mixture of 70% ethanol and glyc erol (Beattie, 1969b).The latter was used to prevent loss of pollen from the stigma and style lobes.Phonological and periodic floral phenomena of P. alba were studied.Data collected included: beginning of flowering, peak of flowering and fruiting, number of flowers opening per day, time of anthesis, time and cyclic fluctua
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.060 | 0.002 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".