MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2015578929 · doi:10.1093/aob/mcu261

The relationship between cell division and elongation during development of the nectar-yielding petal spur in Centranthus ruber (Valerianaceae)

2015· article· en· W2015578929 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Botany · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant Reproductive Biology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBiologyPetalSpurTrichomeBotanyNectarCell divisionAnthesisUltrastructureAnatomyPollenCellGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Floral spurs are hollow, tubular outgrowths that typically conceal nectar. By their involvement in specialized pollinator interactions, spurs have ecological and evolutionary significance, often leading to speciation. Despite their importance and diversity in shape and size among angiosperm taxa, detailed investigations of the mechanism of spur development have been conducted only recently. METHODS: Initiation and growth of the nectar-yielding petal spur of Centranthus ruber 'Snowcloud' was investigated throughout seven stages, based on bud size and developmental events. The determination of the frequency of cell division, quantified for the first time in spurs, was conducted by confocal microscopy following 4',6-diamidino-2-phenylindole (DAPI) staining of mitotic figures. Moreover, using scanning electron microscospy of the outer petal spur surface unobstructed by trichomes, morphometry of epidermal cells was determined throughout development in order to understand the ontogeny of this elongate, hollow tube. KEY RESULTS: Spur growth from the corolla base initially included diffuse cell divisions identified among epidermal cells as the spur progressed through its early stages. However, cell divisions clearly diminished before a petal spur attained 30 % of its final length of 4·5 mm. Thereafter until anthesis, elongation of individual cells was primarily responsible for the spur's own extension. Consequently, a prolonged period of anisotropy, wherein epidermal cells elongated almost uniformly in all regions along the petal spur's longitudinal axis, contributed principally to the spur's mature length. CONCLUSIONS: This research demonstrates that anisotropic growth of epidermal cells - in the same orientation as spur elongation - chiefly explains petal spur extension in C. ruber. Representing the inaugural investigation of the cellular basis for spur ontogeny within the Euasterids II clade, this study complements the patterns in Aquilegia species (order Ranunculales, Eudicots) and Linaria vulgaris (order Lamiales, Euasterids I), thereby suggesting the existence of a common underlying mechanism for petal spur ontogeny in disparate dicot lineages.

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.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.188

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.226 · 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