Two laticifer systems in <i>Sapium haematospermum</i> — new records for Euphorbiaceae
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sapium haematospermum Müll.Arg. presents two different laticifer systems, distinguishable on the basis of their structure and ontogeny. Although they are both articulated anastomosing laticifers, produced from procambium and (or) ground meristem, they vary in diameter and in the presence or absence of starch. One of them, originating near the promeristem and leaf primordia, is composed of straight, wide laticifers with rod-shaped starch grains, whereas the other one is made up of narrow and sinuous laticifers that arise in expanding organs. The two systems are observed in almost all tissues of the leaf and in the cortical parenchyma and vascular tissue of the stem. Our results show the presence of two different laticifer systems for the first time in Sapium and contradict former reports that described nonarticulated laticifers in this genus. The occurrence of two different laticifer types in the same genus, and indeed the same plant, is extremely rare. The milky latex of the two laticifer systems of S. haematospermum, which consists of terpenoids, fatty acids, phenolic compounds, proteins, and polysaccharides (including mucilage), plays an efficient role in sealing wounds, blocking microorganisms, and avoiding herbivory.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".