Photosynthetic contribution of cotyledons to early seedling development in <i>Cynoglossum divaricatum</i> and <i>Amaranthus retroflexus</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This study evaluated cotyledon contribution to seedling development in a small‐seeded species ( Cynoglossum divaricatum , seed weight 8.51 mg) and a very small seeded species ( Amaranthus retroflexus , seed weight 0.46 mg), focusing on the balance between the reserve storage role and the photosynthetic role of cotyledons. The data provide insight complementary to that from earlier studies which have not generally included seeds as small as those of A. retroflexus . The data highlight the way in which almost total reliance on the photosynthetic role of cotyledons in small‐seeded species can achieve a very high relative growth rate during early seedling development, and raise the possibility that quantitative determ ination of the ratio between the photosynthetic contribution of cotyledons to seedling development and total (photosynthetic plus reserve) contribution may provide a useful indicator of species competitive strategy and fitness for different habitats.
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".