Generic concepts within hornworts: historical review, contemporary insights and future directions
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although the hornworts (anthocerotes) are a relatively small assemblage of approximately 150 species, generic boundaries and relationships within the group are controversial. The four prevailing classification schemes are based mainly on morphology and show little congruency. Here we set the foundation for contemporary phylogenetic and taxonomic studies by presenting an historical overview of generic concepts within the anthocerotes. An overview of recent morphological and molecular studies that concentrate on hornworts points to intuitive, novel relationships and a degree of diversity hitherto unknown in the group. Phylogenetically informative characters at the morphological level are identified, with emphasis on newly acquired ultrastructural data. A recent molecular analysis based on rbcL sequences is presented and the levels of suitability of several molecular markers to answer phylogenetic questions within the group are explored. On-going intensive studies that sample a wider range of species and utilise multiple genes and comprehensive morphological data are likely to revolutionise interpretations of the taxonomic relationships and character evolution within hornworts.
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.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it