<i>Cecilanthus polymerus</i>, a novel multiparted flower from the mid-Cretaceous Rocky Point locality, Maryland
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A flower from the early Cenomanian of northeastern Maryland, Cecilanthus polymerus gen. et sp. nov., is described using SEM and synchrotron X-ray microtomography. The flower has >20 strap-shaped tepals, ca. 50 spatulate stamens with embedded adaxial pollen sacs and possibly H-valvate dehiscence, and ca. 100 more-or-less plicate carpels. Floral phyllotaxis is whorled, with >10 parts per whorl, but slightly irregular. Pollen and ovules are not preserved, but locule shape suggests that the carpels are uniovulate. Similar characters occur in extant Magnoliales and the basal ANITA grade, but never in combination. In an attempt to resolve these ambiguities, we performed morphological phylogenetic analyses, with the arrangement of extant taxa constrained to trees based primarily on molecular data. With anther dehiscence and ovule number treated as unknown, Cecilanthus has several most-parsimonious positions: nested in Nymphaeales, nested in Magnoliales, sister to Laurales, and sister to Chloranthaceae. However, scoring anther dehiscence as H-valvate and ovule number as = 1, increases support for a position in Magnoliales. Cecilanthus demonstrates that the early radiation of angiosperms produced floral morphotypes unlike those in any surviving taxa, and it illustrates the value of characters such as pollen morphology and seed anatomy for phylogenetic placement of floral mesofossils.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".