Comparative Nectary Morphology across Cleomaceae (Brassicales)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Floral nectaries have evolved multiple times and rapidly diversified with the adaptive radiation of animal pollinators. As such, floral nectaries exhibit extraordinary variation in location, size, shape, and secretory mechanism. Despite the intricate ties to pollinator interactions, floral nectaries are often overlooked in morphological and developmental studies. As Cleomaceae exhibits substantial floral diversity, our objective was to describe and compare floral nectaries between and within genera. Floral nectary morphology was assessed through scanning electron microscopy and histology across three developmental stages of nine Cleomaceae species including representatives for seven genera. A modified fast green and safranin O staining protocol was used to yield vibrant sections without highly hazardous chemicals. Cleomaceae floral nectaries are most commonly receptacular, located between the perianth and stamens. The floral nectaries are supplied by vasculature, often contain nectary parenchyma, and have nectarostomata. Despite the shared location, components, and secretory mechanism, the floral nectaries display dramatic diversity in size and shape, ranging from adaxial protrusions or concavities to annular disks. Our data reveal substantive lability in form with both adaxial and annular floral nectaries interspersed across Cleomaceae. Floral nectaries contribute to the vast morphological diversity of Cleomaceae flowers and so are valuable for taxonomic descriptions. Though Cleomaceae floral nectaries are often derived from the receptacle and receptacular nectaries are common across flowering plants, the role of the receptacle in floral evolution and diversification is overlooked and warrants further exploration.
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 | 0.001 |
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".