Phenotypic variation of floral organs in flowering crabapples and its taxonomic significance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background In angiosperms, phenotypic variation of floral organs is often considered as the traditional basis for the evolutionary relationship of different taxonomic groups above the species level. However, little is known about that at or below the species level. Here, we experimentally tested the phenotypic variation of Malus floral organs using combined methods of intraspecific uniformity test, interspecific distinctness analysis, principal component analysis, Pearson correlation analysis, and Q-type cluster analysis. The ancestor-inclined distribution characteristic analysis of Malus species and cultivars floral attributes was also carried out, so as to explore its taxonomic significance. Results 15/44 phenotypic traits (e.g., flower shape, flower type, flower diameter, ...) were highly consistent, distinguishable, and independent and could be used as the basis for Malus germplasm taxonomy. The studied 142 taxa were divided into two groups (A, B) and five sub-groups (A 1 , A 2 , B 1 , B 2 , B 3 ), with significantly variable floral phenotypic attributes between groups and within sub-groups. Malus natural species were relatively clustered in the same section (series) while homologous cultivars showed evidence of ancestor-inclined distribution characteristics. However, no significant correlation between the evolutionary order of sections (Sect. Docyniopsis → Sect. Chloromeles → Sect. Sorbomalus → Sect. Eumalus ) and group/sub-groups (B 3 → B 2 → B 1 → A). Conclusions Phenotypic variation of floral organs could better explore the genetic relationship between Malus taxa. The findings improved our cognition of floral phenotypic variation taxonomic significance under the species level.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".