Development of cell wall modifications in the endodermis and exodermis of <i>Allium cepa</i> roots
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The cytological events of wall modification in the endodermis and exodermis of Allium cepa L. roots were examined with fluorescence and transmission electron microscopy. In the endodermis, Casparian bands, suberin lamellae, and tertiary walls developed in succession. At the site of the future Casparian band, the plasma membrane was bound to the wall before deposition of detectable hydrophobic components in the radial wall. Suberin lamellae were deposited on the inner faces of the primary walls, first along the outer tangential walls and then the inner tangential walls. On both walls, segments of the lamellae were formed earlier in primary pit fields than at nonprimary pit field regions. Suberin lamellae then extended to the radial walls. When they reached the Casparian bands, the lamellae intruded between the bound plasma membranes and the walls, so that the cells' plasma membranes remained intact. In this way, suberin lamellae that were continuous around the cells were laid down. Later, tertiary walls were deposited internal to the suberin lamellae. None of the wall modifications interrupted the symplastic connections of the endodermis. During suberin lamella and tertiary wall formation, more dictyosomes and ER profiles appeared than during Casparian band development. In the exodermis, although Casparian bands were readily detected with fluorescence microscopy, they were rarely detected with electron microscopy. Suberin lamellae were formed in long cells severing their plasmodesmata. As in the endodermis, dictyosomes and ER were prominent during suberin lamella formation. Tertiary walls were not formed in the exodermis.Key words: Allium cepa, Casparian band, endodermis, exodermis, suberin lamella, ultrastructure.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".