Floral organogenesis in <i>Dysosma versipellis</i> (Berberidaceae) and its systematic implications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Berberidaceae and the six other families of Ranunculales form a sister clade to all other eudicots, and are crucial to reconstructing the common ancestor of flowering plants. Previous studies have suggested that the petals of most Berberidaceae are derived from stamens, and some are thought to develop petals from common petal/stamen primordia. However, the flower ontogeny is still poorly known in the family and the presence of common primordia needs to be re-evaluated from a comparative developmental perspective. Here, we used scanning electron microscopy to study the floral development of the endemic Chinese species Dysosma versipellis (Hance) M. Cheng ex Ying, which was originally placed in Podophyllum. Our results show that the floral organs are all free and the sepals, petals, and stamens are initiated centripetally in successive and alternate trimerous pairs of whorls around a single carpel. The nectarless petals are initiated separately and do not develop from common primordia with the stamens. Floral and developmental features of D. versipellis are similar to those of most members of Berberidaceae. The regular development of multiple flowers and absence of a secondary increase in the number of stamens in Dysosma support its exclusion from Podophyllum, and this is also inferred by the DNA sequence data.
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".