The ecology of pollination and nectar robbing in Linaria vulgaris in the Colorado Rocky Mountains
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cheaters affect most mutualisms, but their effects remain misunderstood. This thesis investigates aspects of plant-nectar robber interactions in Linaria vulgaris. Nectar robbing reduced pollinator visitation and nectar standing crop. This suggests that robbers negatively affect fitness; however, researchers have found no such effect. Aspects of floral development, inflorescence architecture, and robber behaviour may mitigate the costs of nectar larceny. I suggest that L. vulgaris has a number of characteristics that make nectar robbing negligible. These include vertical patterns of flower maturation, separated nectaries and nectar storage, and closed corollas. Robbed plants attracted more ants than unrobbed plants. Ant access reduced herbivory and increased fitness. Robbing had no effect, but had weak interactions with ant access. Researchers interested in nectar robbers should consider when and why the outcomes of multi-species relationships vary. Such a viewpoint may infuse community ecology with new insights about species interactions and their roles in ecosystem function.
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 | 0.001 | 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".