Calcium oxalate crystal macropatterns in leaves of species from groups Glycine and Shuteria (Glycininae; Phaseoleae; Papilionoideae; Fabaceae)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Calcium oxalate crystal macropatterns in leaves were characterized for 69 species (and two Glycine tomentella cytotypes) from 14 of 16 genera in two legume groups, Glycine and Shuteria, to determine whether they share a common macropattern. A leaf clearing method was used to visualize the crystals. All 69 species (and two Glycine tomentella cytotypes) displayed prismatic crystals associated with leaf veins and vein endings. In contrast, mesophyll crystals occurred in 76.8% of 69 species and two G. tomentella cytotypes, and varied from a few to many. Conversely, only 40.9% of 22 Glycine species (in group Glycine) lacked mesophyll crystals, while 8.7% of 23 species of six genera associated with Glycine (in group Glycine) lacked mesophyll crystals. Thus 24.4% of 45 species of seven combined genera in group Glycine lacked mesophyll crystals. With seven genera in group Shuteria, 20.8% of 24 species lacked mesophyll crystals. The consistently present vein crystals varied in size and shape, so their length–width (Stubby versus Long) crystal ratios were determined for primary, secondary, and tertiary veins, and vein endings. Two trends were evident: Long-crystal ratios increased from primary veins to vein endings in species in both groups, and the perennial and annual Glycine species showed this condition to a greater extent than all the non-Glycine species. In some cases, taxonomically closely associated species were quite similar in their macropattern and presence or absence of mesophyll crystals. These results should be of value to future studies dealing with taxonomy and phylogeny of species in these two leguminous groups.
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) | 0.001 | 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".