Leaf epidermal characteristics of <i>Lotus</i> subgenus <i>Acmispon</i> (Fabaceae: Loteae) and a numerical taxonomic evaluation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper describes the leaf epidermal characteristics of the New World species of Lotus L. subgenus Acmispon Raf. (Fabaceae: Loteae), computes their phenetic relationships based on morphological and anatomical characters, and compares these results with previous classifications and a recent phylogenetic hypothesis for the group based on morphological data. Leaves of 16 species of Acmispon were cleared and examined using light microscopy. Data on epidermal cells, stomata, stomatal index, and trichomes were described and summarized. To test the taxonomic value of epidermal characters and to ascertain phenetic relationships, we performed two numerical analyses using unweighted pair-group arithmetic average clustering. Results of the numerical analysis (16 operational taxonomic units (OTUs) × 13 epidermal characters) suggested that epidermal characteristics are insufficient to resolve sections Simpeteria and Microlotus. An additional analysis (16 OTUs × 23 characters) demonstrated that epidermal micro morphological features, together with other characters, are useful and informative for distinguishing these two sections. Results generated by the latter analysis accord well with earlier classifications and a previous phylogenetic hypothesis by showing that the sections Simpeteria and Microlotus are coincident with the two monophyletic subgroups Grandiflorus and Salsuginosus, respectively, inferred using cladistic analysis.Key words: Acmispon, epidermis, Fabaceae, Loteae, Lotus, Microlotus, Simpeteria.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".