Inflorescence morphology and development in the basal rosid lineage Vitales
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This review summarizes inflorescence developmental morphology in the grape order Vitales within a phylogenetic context. Inflorescences in the shrubby Leeaceae are terminal thyrses that appear leaf‐opposed once renewal growth begins. Plants of the Vitaceae are mainly tendrilled lianas and form five well‐defined clades. Inflorescences develop from the unique, non‐leafy, uncommitted primordium which arises opposite a leaf on the flank of the shoot apical meristem, and may mature into an inflorescence, tendril, or a combination of the two. The Ampelopsis‐Rhoicissus clade, Cissus antarctica group and Yua have a tendril/inflorescence, with cymose branching on the inflorescence axis. Inflorescences in the core Cissus clade and Cyphostemma‐Tetrastigma clade arise on a compressed axillary shoot, and leaf‐opposed tendrils arise on the main shoot, resulting in different branch orders. In Parthenocissus, tendrils are leaf‐opposed on long shoots, and inflorescences are leaf‐opposed on axillary branches on short shoots. In the Ampelocissus‐Vitis clade, the leaf‐opposed tendrils and thyrse inflorescences are of the same branching order, and are often combined. Terminal inflorescences such as in Leeaceae are common in angiosperms, in contrast to the unique leaf‐opposed tendril/inflorescence of Vitaceae. The further separation of the tendrils and inflorescences onto different orders of branching (core Cissus , Cyphostemma‐Tetrastigma ), or separate short and long shoots ( Parthenocissus ), have allowed each component to optimize its own function. The Ampelocissus‐Vitis clade, however, has returned to a thyrse inflorescence, which may allow for larger or unusual lamellate inflorescences ( Pterisanthes ), and has reunited tendrils and inflorescences. Thus, each clade has developed its own set of inflorescence morphology.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 it