Quantifying Shape Changes and Tissue Deformation in Leaf Development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The analysis of biological shapes has applications in many areas of biology, and tools exist to quantify organ shape and detect shape differences between species or among variants. However, such measurements do not provide any information about the mechanisms of shape generation. Quantitative data on growth patterns may provide insights into morphogenetic processes, but since growth is a complex process occurring in four dimensions, growth patterns alone cannot intuitively be linked to shape outcomes. Here, we present computational tools to quantify tissue deformation and surface shape changes over the course of leaf development, applied to the first leaf of Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana). The results show that the overall leaf shape does not change notably during the developmental stages analyzed, yet there is a clear upward radial deformation of the leaf tissue in early time points. This deformation pattern may provide an explanation for how the Arabidopsis leaf maintains a relatively constant shape despite spatial heterogeneities in growth. These findings highlight the importance of quantifying tissue deformation when investigating the control of leaf shape. More generally, experimental mapping of deformation patterns may help us to better understand the link between growth and shape in organ development.
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".