MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2982473630 · doi:10.1098/rsif.2019.0454

Three-dimensional functional gradients direct stem curling in the resurrection plant <i>Selaginella lepidophylla</i>

2019· article· en· W2982473630 on OpenAlexafffund
Véronique Brulé, Ahmad Rafsanjani, Meisam Asgari, Tamara L. Western, Damiano Pasini

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of The Royal Society Interface · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicBiocrusts and Microbial Ecology
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung
KeywordsCurlingContext (archaeology)BotanyCell wallBiophysicsBiologyMaterials scienceComposite material

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Upon hydration and dehydration, the vegetative tissue of Selaginella lepidophylla can reversibly swell and shrink to generate complex morphological transformations. Here, we investigate how structural and compositional properties at tissue and cell wall levels in S. lepidophylla lead to different stem curling profiles between inner and outer stems. Our results show that directional bending in both stem types is associated with cross-sectional gradients of tissue density, cell orientation and secondary cell wall composition between adaxial and abaxial stem sides. In inner stems, longitudinal gradients of cell wall thickness and composition affect tip-to-base tissue swelling and shrinking, allowing for more complex curling as compared to outer stems. Together, these features yield three-dimensional functional gradients that allow the plant to reproducibly deform in predetermined patterns that vary depending on the stem type. This study is the first to demonstrate functional gradients at different hierarchical levels combining to operate in a three-dimensional context.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.182 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations29
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of The Royal Society InterfaceSame topicBiocrusts and Microbial EcologyFrench-language works237,207