Occurrence of phi thickenings is correlated with gymnosperm systematics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Phi thickenings are lignified wall thickenings in the radial and tangential walls of the root cortex of some plant species and are so named because they resemble the Greek letter phi in cross section. Although their occurrence has long been known in gymnosperms, a systematic survey of their presence has never been undertaken. Such a survey may be useful to future studies of the functions of these structures. Roots of 22 species of gymnosperms representing all of the major groups were hand sectioned, stained with phloroglucinol (a lignin stain), and examined for the presence of phi thickenings using light microscopy. Detailed observations on Thuja occidentalis (Cupressaceae) were made to provide a baseline for comparison in this study. Phi thickenings were absent in the species examined in the Cycadaceae, Gnetaceae, Pinaceae, and Podocarpaceae and were present in the Ginkgoaceae, Araucariaceae, Taxaceae, and Cupressaceae (s.l.). These results, when combined with previous literature reports, indicate that the occurrence of phi thickenings is consistent within a family. Their occurrence is also correlated with current hypotheses of phylogenetic relationships within the gymnosperms, which may indicate their usefulness as a systematic character.Key words: phi thickenings, root anatomy, gymnosperms.
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) | 0.001 | 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".