Rules of crown development in the clonal shrub <i>Vaccinium hirtum</i> in a low-light understory: a quantitative analysis of architecture
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The rules of crown development in the clonal shrub Vaccinium hirtum Thunb. in a low-light understory were identified by architectural analysis, and the structure and dynamics of current-year shoots were quantified. Development started from an initial orthotropic axis, which forked into plagiotropic axes; consequently, arched stems were formed. Subsequently, a new orthotropic shoot arose from the dormant meristem on the stem. The process from orthotrophy to plagiotrophy was then repeated. Ramets developed vertically as a result of the repeated formation of such orthotropic shoots and reached a maximum height of about 2 m. These processes were mainly characterized by the sequential change from orthotrophy to plagiotrophy in stem orientation and by a sequential reduction in shoot growth, in which a long shoot forked into shorter shoots with increasing allocation to leaves relative to stems. These rules may be adaptive for efficient light capture under conditions of low light availability, in terms of a low degree of self-shading and low cost of supporting tissue. Simultaneously, these rules worked to restrict the developmental potential of crowns, including the lateral expansion of crowns and the longevity of branch systems. This may be associated with a shrub-specific, throwaway design for stems that are expendable in high-stress environments.Key words: crown architecture, branching, leaf display, architectural unit, reiteration.
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".