Development of leaf shape in two North American native species of<i>Ampelopsis</i>(Vitaceae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Vitaceae (grape family) is a large group of plants with a world-wide distribution. Despite the economic importance of cultivated grapes (Vitis vinifera L.), very little is known about leaf development in the Vitaceae. The genus Ampelopsis contains simple- and compound-leafed forms making it an appropriate genus in which to conduct a comparative developmental study. The Ampelopsis clade diverged early from the rest of the Vitaceae, and the simple- and compound-leaf morphologies are separated into two distinct lineages, leaving the question of how this morphological disjunct arose and what the ancestral leaf shape of this genus might have been. Thus, understanding the development of this trait will clarify our understanding of basic Vitaceae leaf characters and of leaf shape evolution. We found that although the primordia of both the simple- and compound-leafed species shared a fundamental plan that would be predicted to result in a mature complex leaf shape at the outset, their developmental trajectory diverges early in development. We also identified key morphological landmarks that suggest homology between the two species. Based on current phylogenetic analysis, we discuss how our developmental study likely points to homologies that reflect their recent common ancestry despite the morphological disjunct observed in the genus.
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".