MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406918106 · doi:10.1111/nph.20413

The asymmetry engine: how plants harness asymmetries to shape their bodies

2025· review· en· W4406918106 on OpenAlexafffund
Kristoffer Jonsson, Anne‐Lise Routier‐Kierzkowska, Rishikesh P. Bhalerao

Bibliographic record

VenueNew Phytologist · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Molecular Biology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersKempestiftelsernaKempe FoundationNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesKnut och Alice Wallenbergs StiftelseVetenskapsrådet
KeywordsAsymmetryBiologyPlant growthAuxinFluctuating asymmetryBiological systemNeuroscienceCell biologyBiophysicsEvolutionary biologyBotanyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Plant development depends on growth asymmetry to establish body plans and adapt to environmental stimuli. We explore how plants initiate, propagate, and regulate organ-wide growth asymmetries. External cues, such as light and gravity, and internal signals, including stochastic cellular growth variability, drive these asymmetries. The plant hormone auxin orchestrates growth asymmetry through its distribution and transport. Mechanochemical feedback loops, exemplified by apical hook formation, further amplify growth asymmetries, illustrating the dynamic interplay between biochemical signals and physical forces. Growth asymmetry itself can serve as a continuous cue, influencing subsequent growth decisions. By examining specific cellular programs and their responses to asymmetric cues, we propose that the decision to either amplify or dampen these asymmetries is key to shaping plant organs.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNew PhytologistSame topicPlant Molecular Biology ResearchFrench-language works237,207