Biomechanics and development of rattans: what is special about Plectocomia himalayana Griff. (Calamoideae, Plectocomiinae)?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Mechanical and morphological studies of Plectocomia himalayana (subtribe Plectocomiinae) revealed characteristics that differ strongly from species of subtribe Calaminae (Calamus and Daemonorops). In species of Calaminae tested previously, the contribution of the leaf sheath drastically increases stiffness in juvenile axes and towards the apex of older plants. In P. himalayana the relative contribution of the leaf sheath to axis stiffness is less and leaf sheath senescence does not strongly reduce axial stiffness as observed in Calamus and Daemonorops. Natural aerial branching, only described in Korthalsia and Laccosperma among rattans, is common in P. himalayana. Aerial branching and adventitious roots occur frequently along old stems allowing autonomy of stems, following mechanical injury and promoting vegetative propagation. The climbing habit is known to have evolved at least twice within the Calamoideae. The results observed here suggest that climbing habits may differ in detail and that different ‘climbing strategies’ may have evolved within the subfamily Calamoideae resulting from: (1) variable stem flexibility, (2) the variable mechanical role of the leaf sheath (Calamus–Daemonorops) and (3) production of branches and aerial roots conferring a higher degree of architectural plasticity (Plectocomia).
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".