MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2105074134 · doi:10.3732/ajb.92.9.1444

Biomechanics and development of the climbing habit in two species of the South American palm genus <i>Desmoncus</i> (Arecaceae)

2005· article· en· W2105074134 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Sandrine Isnard, Thomas Speck, Nick Rowe

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Botany · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Diversity and Evolution
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAgence Universitaire de la Francophonie
KeywordsBiologyClimbingLianaBotanyHabitGenusPlant stemJuvenileAnatomyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mechanical properties are investigated in Desmoncus orthacanthos and D. polyacanthos from French Guiana, South America. Differences in size and axis stiffness are related to different trellis requirements and habitats. The leaf sheath surrounds the stem, increasing stiffness of young self-supporting stages and apical parts of older climbing plants. Senescence of the leaf sheath reduces stiffness of older climbing axes of both species. Its eventual loss in D. orthacanthos facilitates deformation into coils and loops when plants slip from their supports following senescence of leaves bearing attachment organs. In smaller climbing axes of D. polyacanthos, the senescent leaf sheath remains attached and axes rarely form loops and coils below attachment. An increase in stiff mechanical properties toward the base of both species is radically different from that of many dicotyledonous lianas. Besides the presence of attachment organs, stem mechanical properties of Desmoncus are similar to those of erect though not fully self-supporting stems of Bactris major, a sympatric species of the sister group genus to Desmoncus. The climbing habit in Desmoncus may have evolved via (1) heterochronic processes including early elongation of internodes relative to increase in stem diameter (reduction of the establishment phase) and (2) increased persistence of leaf sheaths.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.656
Threshold uncertainty score0.118

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.181 · 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

Citations27
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of BotanySame topicPlant Diversity and EvolutionFrench-language works237,207