MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2031226604 · doi:10.1139/b99-138

Preformation and neoformation of growth units on 3-year-old seedlings of <i>Quercus petraea</i>

2000· article· en· W2031226604 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Florence Fontaine, Hatem Chaar, Francis Colin, Christophe Clément, Monique Burrus, Jean-Louis Druelle

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Botany · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Physiology and Cultivation Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCentre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement
KeywordsQuercus petraeaPhotosynthesisBiologyShootBotanyHorticultureBudSecondary growthXylem

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this work was to determine the preformed or neoformed nature of the three successive growth units occurring in 1 year on the leader shoot of 3-year-old Quercus petraea (Matt.) Liebl. seedlings in 1997 and 1998. We compared the number of foliar organs between the first, second, and third growth units and their respective terminal buds. The foliar organs counted on the growth units were basal scales or scaly leaves and photosynthetic leaves, and the foliar organs counted within the buds were future photosynthetic leaves, undetermined foliar organs, and internal scales that indicated a period of rest. The results were (i) the winter terminal bud enclosed internal scales, and it possessed more foliar organs than the first growth unit; (ii) the terminal bud of the first growth unit did not contain any internal scales, and it possessed fewer foliar organs than the second growth unit; and (iii) the terminal bud of the second growth unit sometimes contained one or more internal scales, and it possessed fewer or the same number of foliar organs than the third growth unit. These results showed that (i) the first growth unit is entirely preformed in the winter bud, (ii) the second growth unit possesses both preformed and neoformed portions, and (iii) the third growth unit could be either totally preformed, or partially preformed and partially neoformed. Neoformation is more prevalent in the second growth unit than in the third. The difference between the total number of foliar organs in the bud and on the growth unit is more pronounced in the second growth unit than in the third.

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 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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.841
Threshold uncertainty score0.127

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.166
Teacher spread0.155 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations23
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of BotanySame topicPlant Physiology and Cultivation StudiesFrench-language works237,207