A temporal and morphological framework for flower development in <i>Antirrhinum majus</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The entire course of flower development in Antirrhinum majus L., from initiation to maturity, is described in terms of regular time intervals. Floral meristem and bud morphology was determined by scanning electron microscopy for a sequence of 58 plastochrons. These can be grouped to define 15 stages or 7 phases of development, providing a temporal framework for gene expression and key morphological events, such as the formation of the complex corolla. The time course is also used to estimate overall growth rates of sepals and petals. Sepals initially grow at a constant rate, but growth rate gradually declines at later stages and sepal growth eventually arrests before flower development is complete. Petals initially grow at a similar rate to that of early sepals, but this growth rate is maintained for a longer period, accounting for the larger size of mature petals relative to sepals. Comparisons with Arabidopsis indicate that the duration of growth also makes an important contribution to variation in flower size.Key words: Antirrhinum, flower development, meristems, zygomorphy, developmental timing, petal.
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 | 0.000 | 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".