Some characters of the pollen of spring and summer flowering common oak (Quercus robur L.)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summer flowering of the common oak is a natural rarity, considering the large area of the species natural distribution. This phenomenon can be classified as an ancestral (atavistic) property. Pollen morphological and physiological characters from spring flowering male inflorescences collected over the period 2004 - 2007 and summer flowering male inflorescences collected in 1999 were compared. The analysis included the pollen of a tree with frequent summer flowering and a control tree with spring flowering only. The size and form of summer pollen differed from the spring flowering pollen. The germination percentage and germination energy depended on the pollen growing medium (0, 5, 10, 15, 20, 25% sucrose solution), year of collection (2004 - 2007), temperature (+5?C and -20?C) and storage period (1 to 24 months). The study results are significant for the explanation of common oak phylogenetic development, and they contribute to the knowledge of pollen characters under the effects of different factors.
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 | 0.001 | 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".