Following the Initiation and Development of Individual Leaf Primordia at the Level of the Shoot Apical Meristem: The Case of Distichous Phyllotaxis in Begonia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: By using the technique of replicas of a developing apex it is possible to obtain a direct measure of phyllotactic parameters (plastochrone and platochronic ratio) involved in the initiation of two successive primordia at the level of the SAM. The goal of this study is to compare, in a real time setting, the value of phyllotactic parameters in distichous systems using Begonia as a case study, with the value of the same parameters in spiral phyllotactic systems. METHODS: To determine the real-time sequence of events at the level of the SAM, replicas were made of the developing apex at different intervals using previously described techniques. Impression moulds were made at 24-h intervals. The following phyllotactic parameters were measured: plastochrone, angle of divergence, plastochrone ratio and ratio between the diameter of the leaf and the apex. RESULTS: The time between the appearance of two successive leaves is 15-20 d. The average value of the plastochrone ratio (R) is 1.3, and the ratio of the leaf to the diameter of the apex (Gamma) is 2.5. The angle of divergence varies from 165 masculine to 180 masculine. The speed of advection of the primordium from the apex, varies from 0.28 to 0.37 microm d(-1). CONCLUSIONS: The speed of advection of primordia in Begonia is lower than that of Anagalis. This is not in accordance with theoretical simulations that predict the opposite. In Begonia, the plastochrone ratio does not reflect the real time of appearance of two successive primordia. The time separating the appearance of two primordia is not directly related to the distance of these two primordia from the centre of the apex but is related instead to the enlargement of leaves.
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) | 0.000 | 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 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".