MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Primary vasculature in Chenopodiaceae: a re-interpretation and implications for systematics and evolution

2003· article· en· W2084085057 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Turki A. Al‐Turki, K. Swarupanandan, Paul Wilson

Bibliographic record

VenueBotanical Journal of the Linnean Society · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Diversity and Evolution
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of CalicutKing Abdulaziz City for Science and TechnologyUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsBiologyTaxonReticulate evolutionReticulateEvolutionary biologyPrimary (astronomy)SystematicsBotanyPhylogeneticsTaxonomy (biology)Genetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The foliar theory of the stem, the application of which has been restricted to the pteridophytes, is now extended to the spermatophytes and the vasculature of the primary stem is viewed as a sympodium of foliar traces. Several new terms have been coined for the description of the primary vasculature; these include terms for vascular reticula and sympodia and two new conventions, the interleaf articulation ratio and interleaf articulation spacing. The patterns of primary vasculature in 20 Chenopodiaceous taxa have been re-described using a synoptic descriptive style. Based on the primary vasculature, within the Chenopodiaceae, two clear-cut groups have been recognized: (1) a Trioid vascular group, with 3-traced leaves and a median composite double trace, or taxa having such an ancestry; and (2) a Monoid vascular group, comprising taxa with 1-traced leaves and a composite double trace, or with this ancestry. The first group comprises the tribes Beteae , Chenopodieae , Atripliceae and probably the Polycnemeae and Corispermeae . The second group comprises the tribes Salsoleae , Suaedeae , Salicornieae and Camphorosmeae . In both the groups, reticulate and open vasculature are found, the latter being the derived state; the open vasculature derived from 3-traced ancestry is found to be different from that derived from 1-traced ancestry. These two groups differ from the subfam. Chenopodioideae ( Cyclolobeae ) and Salsoloideae ( Spirolobeae ), the groups identified on the basis of the cycloid/spiroid embryonic types. They match well with the groups identified from the chloroplast DNA analysis and appear to have distinct adaptive strategies; the first with modified/accrescent bracts, and the second with modified/accrescent perianth lobes. The findings from the primary vasculature therefore support the re-circumscription of the two subfamilies Chenopodioideae and Salsoloideae and the transfer of the tribes Camphorosmeae and Salicornieae to Salsoloideae . The processes involved in the diversification of primary vasculature in the Chenopodiaceae have been: changes from spiral to opposite phyllotaxy, reduction in the number of vertical rows of leaves, closed to open vasculature, non-storied to storied reticula, asymmetric to symmetric reticula, change in the loci of vascular articulations from the contributory arms to terminal arm of the composite trace, and wedgedsagittate to entire-acute base of reticula. Development of open vasculature from closed vasculature probably took place several times and followed independent lines. Therefore, many tribes in the family may be paraphyletic. Evolution of distichous sympodia from monostichous sympodia and vice versa, as proposed by earlier authors have been refuted. Strong correspondence of inference emerging from analysis of chloroplast DNA and primary vasculature refutes the probability of a protostelic origin of the eustele. It is argued that an atactostelic condition might have been ancestral, which gave rise to the protostelic condition on the one hand, and on the other to the eustele. The angiosperm leaf is considered as a composite organ formed by the syngenesis of two or more leaves/leaf lobes from different nodes, the details of which remain to be determined.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.415
Threshold uncertainty score0.114

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.192 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBotanical Journal of the Linnean SocietySame topicPlant Diversity and EvolutionFrench-language works237,207