The Hidden Diversity of Vascular Patterns in Flower Heads
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Summary Vascular systems are intimately related to the shape and spatial arrangement of the plant organs they support. We investigate the largely unexplored association between spiral phyllotaxis and the vascular system in Asteraceae flowers heads. We imaged heads of eight species using synchrotron-based X-ray micro-computed tomography and applied original virtual reality and haptic software to explore head vasculature in three dimensions. We then constructed a computational model to infer a plausible patterning mechanism. The vascular system in the head of the model plant Gerbera hybrida is qualitatively different from those of Bellis perennis and Helianthus annuus , characterized previously. Cirsium vulgare, Craspedia globosa, Echinacea purpurea, Echinops bannaticus , and Tanacetum vulgare represent variants of the Bellis and Helianthus systems. In each species the layout of the main strands is stereotypical, but details vary. The observed vascular patterns can be generated by a common computational model with different parameter values. In spite of the observed differences of vascular systems in heads, they may be produced by a conserved mechanism. The diversity and irregularities of vasculature stand in contrast with the relative uniformity and regularity of phyllotactic patterns, confirming that phyllotaxis in heads is not driven by the vasculature.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".