MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2041435336 · doi:10.1139/b02-112

Seed cone structure in conifers in relation to development and pollination: a biological approach

2002· article· en· W2041435336 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
P. B. Tomlinson, Tokushiro Takaso

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Botany · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBotany and Plant Ecology Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Chicago
KeywordsOvuleCupressaceaePollenBiologyPollinationPodocarpaceaeBotanyStrobilusPinaceaePinus <genus>

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Seed production in conifers involves an extended sequence of developmental events that may take as long as 3 years to complete. There is a conflict between two major processes: initial pollination of ovules and subsequent maturation of seeds after fertilization. The conflict arises because ovules must be exposed at first to receive pollen (the gymno-ovulate condition), and subsequently seeds must be protected during maturation (the angiospermous condition). The "Florin model", which shows that the coniferous cone was ancestrally a compound structure, provides a constructional "Bauplan" whose modifications can be understood by developmental study. In the majority of conifers there is no consistent ovule-bearing structure, even though this is required by the model; much of cone ontogeny is determined by intercalary meristematic activity that results in cone closure after pollination. Two main constructional types can be recognized. In Cephalotaxaceae, Cupressaceae, Sciadopityaceae, Taxaceae, and Taxodiaceae (all without saccate pollen), pollen structure and function is uniform and not associated with special modification of the ovulate cone at the time of pollen capture. In the Pinaceae and Podocarpaceae (mostly with saccate pollen), the ovulate cone is usually highly specialized with regard to pollen capture. In the former group, developmental emphasis is on postpollination events that lead to seed protection or are associated with seed dispersal. In the latter group, there is a duality in ovulate cone morphology, initially associated with pollination, and subsequently with seed protection and dispersal. The general conclusion is that the coniferous cone cannot be treated as a static entity for comparative purposes. The functional attributes of cone structures need to be considered in a very broad context when the evolution of the coniferous cone is discussed.Key words: conifers, development, pollen capture, seed cone.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.184
Teacher spread0.153 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations102
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of BotanySame topicBotany and Plant Ecology StudiesFrench-language works237,207