MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1480300849 · doi:10.17129/botsci.469

Morfología floral y embriología de Begonia gracilis (Begoniaceae): su relevancia en la monoecia

2012· article· es· W1480300849 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Elizabeth Chávez-García, Sonia Vázquez‐Santana

Bibliographic record

VenueBotanical Sciences · 2012
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant and Fungal Species Descriptions
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDirectorate for Biological SciencesUniversité de MontréalUniversity of CambridgeRoyal Society
KeywordsHumanitiesBiologyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

En este estudio se describe el desarrollo de las flores masculinas y femeninas de Begonia gracilis mediante técnicas convencionales de histología y microscopía. La finalidad fue determinar si se desarrolla sólo uno de los verticilos o las flores se inician como bisexuales y hay aborción posterior del androceo o del gineceo. Los resultados indican que la unisexualidad se establece desde el meristemo, ya que en ningún morfo floral aparecen órganos atrofi ados. Las flores femeninas desarrollan un estilo que se trifurca en el ápice, terminando en tres estigmas secos, bilobulados, papilosos y enrollados helicoidalmente. El óvulo es crasinucelado, bitégmico y anátropo, con micrópilo anfístomo. Las flores masculinas desarrollan estambres libres y sin reminiscencias de gineceo. Las tétradas de microsporas son tetraédricas e isobilaterales. El grano de polen es bicelular y tricolporado, con exina estriada y verrugada-estriada cerca de las aberturas. Por lo tanto, los resultados permiten concluir que la unisexualidad en B. gracilis se establece desde el meristemo floral, posiblemente por mutaciones en aquellos genes homeóticos que regulan el desarrollo de los verticilos sexuales.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.261 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBotanical SciencesSame topicPlant and Fungal Species DescriptionsFrench-language works237,207