Morphological and anatomical development in the Vitaceae. VII. Floral development in <i>Rhoicissus digitata</i> with respect to other genera in the family
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study forms part of our series of investigations on genera in the Vitaceae and is the first developmental study for the genus Rhoicissus. Vegetative and reproductive development of shoot apices of Rhoicissus digitata (L.f.) Gilg et Brandt were examined using epi-illumination light microscopy and scanning electron microscopy. Leaf-opposed tendrils or inflorescences, typical of the shoot architecture in the Vitaceae, were present at every node. Macroscopically, the shoot appears to grow either monopodially or sympodially. At the microscopic level, however, shoot development is sympodial; the shoot apical meristem bifurcates unequally, with the larger portion forming an uncommitted primordium, which will become either an inflorescence or a tendril, and the smaller portion (in the position of the axillary bud) forming the new shoot apical meristem. Floral primordia first initiate three sepals followed by a calyx ring on which the last two sepal primordia form. The five petals are initiated in a whorl followed by the five stamens in a petal-opposed position. There is no evidence of a common petal-stamen primordium in this species. The gy noecium is initiated as a ring primordium. Subsequently, the four ovules are initiated at the base of the two septa that grow out from the inner gynoecial wall. The nectary disc forms as an outgrowth of the gynoecium base. Mature flowers have greenish petals and a red nectariferous disc. Flowers are bisexual, and seed germination is approximately 63%. Unlike previous studies in Vitis and Parthenocissus, Rhoicissus appears to have few putatively derived floral developmental characters, which would support its relatively basal position in current phylogenies for the family.Key words: Vitaceae, morphology, development, shoot architecture, flower.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".