Anatomical and ultrastructural studies on gelatinous fibers in the organs of non-woody xerophytic and hydrophytic species
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gelatinous fibers (G-layer) occur widely in various organs and plant tissues of both primary and secondary origin, but they are best known in tension wood. Here, we describe the occurrence, distribution patterns, and structural features of G-fibers in non-woody species of xerophytes and hydrophytes in Brazilian Cerrado (dry soil) and Chaco (wet or periodically waterlogged soils). G-fibers were present in all of the studied species, but were more abundant and more developed in xerophytes. They were associated with the phloem of leaves and primary stems and with the xylem of three xerophytic species that exhibited incipient secondary growth. The G-layer was non-lignified and characterized by greater thickness, lower density, and loose appearance in relation to the secondary layers. Under a transmission electron microscope, G-fibers displayed two secondary parietal layers (S1 and S2) in Prosopis rubriflora Hassle. (xerophyte), three secondary layers (S1, S2, and S3) in Eriosema campestre Benth. var. campestre (xerophyte), and a single secondary layer (S1) in Ludwigia leptocarpa Nutt. (hydrophyte). In P. rubriflora, mature G-fibers exhibited a loose-appearing electron-lucent region (transition zone) between G- and S-layers (secondary layers). In addition to mechanical support, this study suggests the involvement of G-fibers in water storage.
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) | 0.000 | 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 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".