MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2001150532 · doi:10.3732/ajb.0800381

Phylogenetic diversification of <i>Equisetum</i> (Equisetales) as inferred from Lower Cretaceous species of British Columbia, Canada

2009· article· en· W2001150532 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Nicholas A. Stanich, Gar W. Rothwell, Ruth A. Stockey

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Botany · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Diversity and Evolution
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsBiologyBotanyPithShootCretaceousTracheidRhizomeGenusPaleontologyXylem

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Three types of anatomically preserved vegetative shoots with features that characterize crown group Equisetum have been discovered in Lower Cretaceous deposits (≈136 Ma) of British Columbia, Canada, suggesting the genus is much older than currently believed. Specimens include two types of aerial shoots described as E. haukeanum sp. nov. and E. vancouverense sp. nov. and one type of subterranean rhizome. Shoots are 1-2 mm in diameter, jointed, and in cross section have fluted stems with a hollow pith. Distinctive patterns of cortical sclerenchyma and different ridge morphologies characterize each shoot morphotype. Nodes display irregular branching, highly fused leaf sheaths, and a nodal diaphragm. The aerial stem morphospecies have vallecular canals on alternating radii with carinal canals of an equisetostele surrounded by only a few tracheids. No secondary tissues are produced. Bands of surficial stomata flank the furrows of one morphospecies. Rhizomes and aerial shoots are of a similar size, suggesting that the plants were equivalent in stature to the smallest living Equisetum species. These fossils augment our understanding of evolutionary transformations that led from Paleozoic Archaeocalamitaceae and Calamitaceae to crown group Equisetaceae, suggesting that the initial diversification of Equisetum began far earlier than suggested by molecular-clock-based estimates.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.805
Threshold uncertainty score0.386

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.165
Teacher spread0.158 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations37
Published2009
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of BotanySame topicPlant Diversity and EvolutionFrench-language works237,207