MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2167513822 · doi:10.1139/b99-106

Studies in the Alismataceae. XI. Development of the inflorescence and flowers of <i>Wiesneria triandra</i> (Dalzell) Micheli

2000· article· en· W2167513822 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
W. A. Charlton

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Botany · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerianthGynoeciumInflorescenceSepalPetalBiologyStamenBotanyWhorl (mollusc)PollenGenus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wiesneria triandra (Dalzell) Micheli is an unusual annual plant of the Alismataceae with spike-like inflorescences bearing unisexual flowers. Shoot development follows the sympodial pattern of other Alismataceae, but the cycle is so condensed that initiation of each foliage leaf is followed by inflorescence formation. The plant develops a tufted habit by the formation of an unusual accesory bud adjacent to each inflorescence. Male flowers have three sepals, three petals, three stamens, and usually three carpellodes; female flowers have a similar perianth, three staminodes, and three or more carpels. Up to the first three carpels, floral parts are arranged in alternating trimerous whorls. Additional carpels may occur above and between those of the first whorl. The androecium is particularly unusual for the Alismataceae since it has conventional alternation of stamens with petals rather than the antipetalous pairs of stamens commonly perceived in the family, but the phylogenetic postion of Wiesneria within the family (as revealed by other studies) indicates that the apparently conventional androecium of Wiesneria represents a derived state rather than a primitive one. The unisexual flowers also represent a derived state.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.163 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations11
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of BotanySame topicPlant and animal studiesFrench-language works237,207