Anatomy of vegetative organs with an emphasis on the secretory structures of two species of <i>Aldama</i> (Asteraceae–Heliantheae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aldama arenaria (Baker) E.E.Schill. & Panero and Aldama robusta (Gardner) E.E.Schill. & Panero are aromatic plants, morphologically very similar and usually confused on the analysis of exsiccates. The present study aimed to identify the secretory structures present in vegetative organs and to survey for anatomical features with diagnostic value between A. arenaria and A. robusta based on an examination of these organs. Aldama arenaria and A. robusta exhibit hydathodes in the dentate ornamentations of the leaf margins and apices in addition to glandular trichomes, secretory cavities and ducts, all of which vary with respect to type and location in each species. Xylopodia and adventitious roots constitute the underground system. The xylopodium is covered by epidermis or by suberised cells resulting from periclinal divisions of parenchyma cells. The tuberisation process of adventitious roots results mainly from hypertrophy and hyperplasia of medullary cells, especially in A. arenaria. Through anatomical analysis, useful features for distinction between A. arenaria and A. robusta in exsiccates and fresh materials were identified, and these features were related mainly to the position and frequency of secretory structures.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".