MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Pollen and stigma morphology of some Phaseoleae species <b>(</b>Leguminosae<b>)</b> with different pollinators

2010· article· en· W1504555554 on OpenAlexfundno aff
João Paulo Basso‐Alves, Kayna Agostini, Simone de Pádua Teixeira

Bibliographic record

VenuePlant Biology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Saskatchewan
KeywordsPollenBiologyPollinatorPollinationBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pollen transport to a receptive stigma can be facilitated through different pollinators, which submits the pollen to different selection pressures. This study aimed to associate pollen and stigma morphology with zoophily in species of the tribe Phaseoleae. Species of the genera Erythrina, Macroptilium and Mucuna with different pollinators were chosen. Pollen grains and stigmas were examined under light microscopy (anatomy), scanning electronic microscopy (surface analyses) and transmission electronic microscopy (ultrastructure). The three genera differ in terms of pollen wall ornamentation, pollen size, pollen aperture, thickness of the pollen wall, amount of pollenkitt, pollen hydration status and dominant reserves within the pollen grain, while species within each genus are very similar in most studied characteristics. Most of these features lack relationships to pollinator type, especially in Erythrina and Mucuna. Pollen reserves are discussed on a broad scale, according to the occurrence of protein in the pollen of invertebrate- or vertebrate-pollinated species. Some pollen characteristics are more associated to semi-dry stigma requirements. This apical, compact, cuticularised and secretory stigma occurs in all species investigated. We conclude that data on pollen and stigma structure should be included together with those on floral morphology and pollinator behaviour for the establishment of functional pollination classes.

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 score0.002

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.170 · 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

Citations22
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePlant BiologySame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207