A Re-examination of the Root Cortex in Wetland Flowering Plants With Respect to Aerenchyma
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: We review literature and present new observations on the differences among three general patterns of aerenchyma origin and their systematic distributions among the flowering plants, and we clarify terminology on root aerenchyma. SCOPE: From our own previous works and some new observations, we have analysed the root cortex in 85 species of 41 families in 21 orders of flowering plants that typically grow in wetlands to determine the characteristic patterns of aerenchyma. FINDINGS: A developmental and structural pattern that we term expansigeny, as manifested by honeycomb aerenchyma, is characteristic of all aquatic basal angiosperms (the Nymphaeales) and basal monocots (the Acorales). Expansigenous aerenchyma develops by expansion of intercellular spaces into lacunae by cell division and cell expansion. Schizogeny and lysigeny, so often characterized in recent reviews as the only patterns of root cortex lacunar formation, are present in most wetland plants, but are clearly not present in the most basal flowering plants. CONCLUSION: We conclude that expansigeny is the basic type of aerenchyma development in roots of flowering plants and that the presence of expansigenous honeycomb aerenchyma in root cortices was fundamental to the success of the earliest flowering plants found in wetland environments.
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.
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) | 0.001 | 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 it