MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2133294985 · doi:10.1139/b03-125

Aspects of floral morphology in <i>Ambrosina</i> and <i>Arisarum</i> (Araceae)

2004· article· en· W2133294985 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Denis Barabé, Christian Lacroix, Marc Gibernau

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Botany · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Diversity and Evolution
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Prince Edward IslandUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyPollenAraceaeMorphology (biology)ReticulateBotanyPhylogenetic treeCalcium oxalateEvolutionary biologyZoologyAnatomyGeneticsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The floral morphology of Ambrosina and Arisarum is analysed from a developmental and phylogenetic point of view. In Arisarum, there are atypical organs displaying male and female characteristics. This developmental study shows that the male flowers of Ambrosina are di- or tri-androus. A close phylogenetic relationship between Ambrosina and Arisarum is supported by their morphology. Both genera have the same type of pollen (ellipsoid, inaperturate, striate–reticulate) and the mode of dehiscence (by a longitudinal slit) of the thecae. In Arisarum, the pollen is mixed with extracellular prismatic crystals of calcium oxalate.Key words: atypical flowers, calcium oxalate crystals, flower development, phylogeny.

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 score0.650
Threshold uncertainty score0.989

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.169
Teacher spread0.158 · 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

Citations8
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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