http://genomebiology.com/2014/15/12/549
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/visualscience/2013/03/25/plants-have-slow-sex-in-space/#.VMpX4N5iGfQ
http://articles.latimes.com/2009/oct/28/entertainment/et-botany-desire28

In the first article it regards a study a genome study in retain to evolution. within this study it breaks down the entire experiment along side with an explanation. this is supported with hard evidence that was collected through out the experiment. not only does it provide evidence but it breaks it down in a scientific language, so i even have trouble understanding it. therefore not entirely for the public, and a academic source. and argumentative.
The second article is scientific in nature in that it is about plants slow sex in space, but it broken down better for i guess a public audience. It is basic and introduces new terms with definitions through the text, so pretty much anyone could grasp an understanding.  It gives you an experiment that was preformed, but it reports it as if it was done by someone else. so its more informormational in my eyes because it reports info rather then arguing it.
the third source i would say is a non academic source because it doesn't entirely have hard evidence, instead its basically based on simply expressing features. it has evidence but it could be biased. but some not. it talks about how plants have used their looks to prosper and become more favored by human. this could be picked up by anyone and they would be able to understand what the author is pointing out.