Survival, and anatomical and ecophysiological changes in isolated individuals of <i>Tillandsia recurvata</i> L. (Bromeliaceae) grown under different shading conditions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tillandsia recurvata L. may show morphophysiological plasticity in response to radiation availability, since this species is found in different environments. This work aimed to evaluate the anatomical and physiological modifications of T. recurvata isolated individuals under different shading levels and the consequences of these changes on the growth of this species. The individuals were exposed for 60 days to treatments as follows: full sun (unshaded) and shading of 35%, 75%, and 85%. Growth analyses were performed, and the leaf anatomy and water content were assessed. All plants submitted to full sun or 35% shading died, whereas those under 75% and 85% shading survived. The water content in leaves and rhizomes was higher under 85% shading, and this treatment increased the leaf area and the number of leaves in T. recurvata. Leaf dry mass, leaf elongation rate, biomass allocation to rhizomes, and net assimilation rate were higher under 85% shading. The leaves had a thicker hypodermis, lower proportions of both epidermis and vascular bundles, and a higher proportion of chlorophyll parenchyma under 85% shading. Tillandsia recurvata individuals behave as sciophytic, while the formation of clusters may change microclimate conditions; the behavior of clumped plants must be further investigated.
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".