MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Megasporogenesis and Megagametogenesis of Cardamine Parviflora L. (Brassicaceae)

2013· article· en· W4210689836 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
R. E. P. Harvey, Bruce B. Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Pennsylvania Academy of Science · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Ecology and Taxonomy Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGynoeciumOvuleBiologyMegasporeBrassicaceaeSepalStamenBotanyOvaryPetalPollen

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Cardamine parviflora, “small-flowered bittercress”, is a member of the Brassicaceae family. It is found throughout the eastern part of the United States and Canada. Flowering occurs from April through July. It has, as with all mustards, four separate sepals and four separate petals, six stamens, and one pistil with two united carpels. Each carpel has many ovules that start develop from the base of the ovary. Flowers were collected near Rocky Ridge County Park, York, PA and immediately fixed in FPA50. At least 24 h later collections were serially dehydrated to 100% ETOH, and placed in Herr clearing fluid. A Nikon SMZ-U dissecting microscope was used for ovule removal and an attached DSFi1 Nikon digital camera was used to capture the images. Ovules, on the Raj slides, were viewed using a Nikon Eclipse 80i microscope with phase contrast to determine developmental stages and the attached Nikon digital cameras DS-Ri1 was used for image capture. Images of all stages of megasporogenesis and megagametogenesis were saved. A few morphological features determined from this study include are, ovules are campyloptropous, bitegmic and show Polygonum Type megagametophytic development. Developmental features reported here are compared with previous studies of Arabidopsis thaliana L. and Draba verna L.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.787
Threshold uncertainty score0.518

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.188 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Pennsylvania Academy of ScienceSame topicPlant Ecology and Taxonomy StudiesFrench-language works237,207