Stigma form and surface in the tribe Boragineae (Boraginaceae): micromorphological diversity, relationships with pollen, and systematic relevance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A comparative analysis of stigma form in 62 species representing 15 genera of the tribe Boragineae by means of light and electron (transmission and scanning) microscopy highlighted the structural diversity, peculiarity, and functional specialization of the receptive surface of the boraginaceous stigma. Cluster analysis identified 13 stigma morphotypes, 6 of which were peculiar to the genera Anchusella, Brunnera, Cynoglottis, Gastrocotyle, Pentaglottis, and Trachystemon. Nonea showed the broadest intrageneric stigma polymorphism, with 6 types differing in terms of stigma form and papillar structure. Stigma and pollen variations were poorly associated in this complex genus, while in other groups, the pollen-stigma typological correspondence indicated the taxonomic distinctiveness of some critical species, such as Gastrocotyle hispida (Forssk.) C.B. Clarke and Anchusella spp. Positive correlations were found between pollen and papillar size, between interpapillar distance and pollen equatorial diameter, and between pollen volume and style length. Qualitative and quantitative pollen-stigma relationships suggested functional implications of an adaptive nature that were interpreted through the recognition of three distinct stages of early interaction, i.e., capture, lodging, and hydration of the grains.Key words: Boragineae, electron microscopy, micromorphology, pollen-stigma, receptive surface, systematics.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".