A comparison of the early developmental morphologies of <i>Aponogeton madagascariensis</i> and <i>A.</i> <i>boivinianus</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aponogeton madagascariensis (Mirb.) H. Bruggen is an aquatic monocot that develops perforations in its leaves through developmentally regulated programmed cell death (PCD). Aponogeton boivinianus Baill. ex Jum. is a close relative found in comparable environments with leaves that have a similar shape with no perforations. Little is known about the early developmental morphology of the family. This study characterized and compared these two species via scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and confocal laser scanning microscopy using both fresh and fixed specimens. The shoot apical meristem (SAM) of A. madagascariensis was significantly larger than that of A. boivinianus, but there was no difference in phyllotaxy observed, as both exhibited a 2/5 spiral pattern. A novel technique using serial dissections and SEM of fresh, hydrated specimens revealed that there are 16 plastochrons before perforation formation in A. madagascariensis and 34 plastochrons until a similar developmental stage in A. boivinianus. The effects on early development of A. madagascariensis plants with supressed ethylene production were also analyzed. Ethylene inhibition alters leaf development by blocking PCD, but had no significant effect on the SAM morphology or early leaf development in A. madagascariensis.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".