Bibliographic record
Abstract
Prepatterns were initially described independently by Bunning in 1953 for plants and by Stern in 1954 for Drosophila with most of the features essentially the same. The one important difference is that in plants the elements of a prepattern are morphologically recognizable whereas in animals they are detected only indirectly. Two kinds of prepatterns in plants are (a) replacement where elements of a prepattern are substituted by more differentiated elements in the pattern and (b) copy where a pattern forms near the prepattern and both are adaptive but in different ways. A case of replacement is where meristemoid cells in the prepattern are exchanged for stomata in the pattern and an example of copy is the vein pattern in watermelon mesophyll gives rise to nearby stripes in the epidermis. Both replacement and copy prepattern-pattern dualities occur at different levels of plant organization from cell components (thickened vertices in collenchyma) to individual plants (plantlets along the margin of the Bryophyllum leaf). Comparative morphoanatomy of vascular plants finds similar patterns to both lower plants and animals suggesting these features are conserved in the former and had independent origins in the latter.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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".