Lateral root development in a woody plant,<i>Quercus suber</i>L. (cork oak)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The distribution and the ontogenesis of lateral roots have been investigated in the Mediterranean woody species Quercus suber L. (cork oak). Lateral roots arose in protoxylem-based ranks and a tendency to clumping was observed. Three stages are distinguished in lateral root primordium development. Lateral root primordia are derived mainly from pericycle cells. The endodermis contributed to the initial lateral root development, forming an endodermal cover that sloughs off with lateral root emergence. The unemerged lateral roots show an incipient layered root meristem; this meristem can be classified as a closed type meristem. Primary vascular connection takes place with the xylem strand opposite the lateral root primordium and the two adjacent phloem strands. Primary vascular connector elements are derived from pericyclic derivative cells. Vascular parenchyma cells contribute mainly in the development of the cambium and the subsequent secondary xylem and phloem connector elements. The secondary vascular elements of the lateral root and parent root differentiate in continuity. Vascular connection is discussed in relation to the root vascular plexus described in monocotyledonous and in some herbaceous dicotyledonous plants. An endodermis with suberized lamellae is continuous between the lateral and parent root in emerged lateral roots.Key words: lateral root, development pattern, apical lateral root meristem, root vascular connection, Quercus suber L.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".