Bibliographic record
Abstract
N 1935 GEITLER showed that the microspore is a polarized cell in I which the axis of the division of the nucleus of the pollen grain is constant and characteristic of each species or genus.The development of the microspore in Tradescnntia has been carefully described by SAX and EDMONDS (1933).From the description of these authors we can recognize three steps in the development of the pollen grain bcforc the second pollen mitosis: firstly, the movement of the nucleus to a special position accompanied by changes in the cytoplasm and niovenients of the vacuole; secondly, the orientated division; and, thirdly, the differentiation of the two new nuclei.The second pollen division involving only the generative nucleus follows in the pollen tube during the germination of the grain.In Anthominthum, as in other grasses, the first division of the pollen grain ha5 a characteristically oriented and asymmetric spindle and it gives rise to two nuclei of different shape and appearance: one darkly stained that originates near the cell-wall, and another faintly stained larger and more rounded that originates in the middle of the cell.The second division also takes place inside the pollen grain, it consists in the division of the more stained nucleus called the generative, while the other, the vegetative, becomes more and more pale, and remains a resting nucleus.In this division of the generative nucleus, the chromosomes are much contracted, and after telophase the two daughter nuclei start to assume spindle shape.In the material of wild origin of Anthozanthum aristatum BOISS., with B chromosomes, kindly ceded by Ih.G. OSTERGREN ( ~S T E R G R E N , 1947), there were found some disturbances in this process.It was observed that in 7 plants with different numbers of B chromosomes the disturbances were as listed in Table 1. Non-orientntion, weak or non-differentiation of the two nuclei.-111 all the plants, besides the pollen grains with normal orientation and differentiation, there could be found as an occasional intermixture, varying from anther to anther, such in which the two nuclei were un-
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".