Specialized structures in the leaf epidermis of basal angiosperms: morphology, distribution, and homology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The morphology of specialized structures in the leaf epidermis of 32 species of basal (ANITA: Amborella, Nymphaeales, Illiciales, Trimeniaceae, and Austrobaileyaceae) angiosperms, representing all seven families and 11 of 14 genera, was investigated using light and scanning electron microscopy. Distribution, density, and size of structures were also measured, and character evolution was analyzed. Hydropotes are a synapomorphy of Nymphaeales and ethereal oil cells are a synapomorphy of Austrobaileyales, but uniseriate nonglandular trichomes appear to have arisen independently several times. Specialized structures are frequently characterized by adjacent epidermal cells that have striking similarities in their form and arrangement (i.e., architecture) to subsidiary cells of certain types of stomatal complexes. Additionally, forms intermediate to oil cells and stomata, to trichomes and stomata, and to hydropotes and oil cells are present in some taxa. Thus, all of these specialized structures and their adjacent epidermal cells form complexes that may be homologous with, and evolutionarily derived from stomatal complexes, and the specialized structure, or portion thereof, may be homologous to the stoma or guard mother cell. Improved knowledge of the morphology and evolution of these structures in the earliest branching extant angiosperm lineages has a bearing on many diverse areas of botany.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".