Phyllotaxis of the palm<i>Euterpe oleracea</i>Mart. at the level of the shoot apical meristem
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous studies on palm phyllotaxis deal mainly with the mature trunk. The goals of this study are (i) to determine the relationship between the number of parastichies, the divergence angle, and the plastochrone ratio at the level of the shoot apical meristem; (ii) to examine whether there are fluctuations in the divergence angle; (iii) to interpret the significance of phyllotactic parameters with respect to the mode of growth of the apex. The tubular base of the leaf primordium is more or less asymmetrical, and completely surrounds the shoot apical meristem. The phyllotactic system corresponds to a (2, 3) conspicuous parastichy pair. The mean divergence angle per apex varies between 126.9° ± 9.3° (mean ± SD) and 135. 8° ± 8.0°. Divergence angles for all apices fluctuate within a range of 115.89° to 157.33°. The mean plastochrone ratios between apices varies from 1.35 ± 0.18 to 1.58 ± 0.12. The plastochrone ratio at each plastochrone for all apices ranges from 1.09 to 2.00. There is no correlation between the angle of divergence and the plastochrone ratio. There is a fluctuation in the value of the divergence angle that falls within the range predicted by the fundamental theorem of phyllotaxis. The high value of the ratio of the diameter of leaf primordia over the diameter of the apex, and the long plastochrone might explain the lack of correlation between certain phyllotactic parameters.
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) | 0.001 | 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".