Reviewing models of auxin canalization in the context of leaf vein pattern formation in Arabidopsis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In both plants and animals vein networks play an essential role in transporting nutrients. In plants veins may also provide mechanical support. The mechanism by which vein patterns are formed in a developing leaf remains largely unresolved. According to the canalization hypothesis, a signal inducing vein differentiation is transported in a polar manner and is channeled into narrow strands. Since inhibition of auxin transport affects venation patterns, auxin is likely to be part of the signal involved. However, it is not clear whether the canalization hypothesis, initially formulated over 25 years ago, is compatible with recent experimental data. In this paper we focus on three aspects of this question, and show that: (i) canalization models can account for an acropetal development of the midvein if vein formation is sink-driven; (ii) canalization models are in agreement with venation patterns resulting from inhibited auxin transport and (iii) loops and discontinuous venation patterns can be obtained assuming proper spacing of discrete auxin sources.
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 | 0.001 | 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 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".