A multiscale growth atlas of Arabidopsis: linking cell dynamics to organ development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Plant development depends on coordinated growth at cellular and organ scales, yet comparative analyses are hindered by inconsistent reporting of growth across studies. We conducted a meta-analysis of Arabidopsis thaliana growth dynamics, integrating data from 176 studies to create the first multiscale atlas of plant growth. We developed a unified mathematical framework to harmonise growth data from diverse organs (shoot apical meristem, root, hypocotyl, and leaf), methodologies, and experimental setups, allowing the conversion and direct comparison of expansion rates at cellular and organ levels. Analyses revealed both organ-specific and general growth strategies linked to size control. In the meristem, a conserved offset in cell expansion between central and peripheral zones was observed. Root elongation was driven mainly by cell expansion and differentiation in the elongation zone, rather than meristem activity. Hypocotyl and leaf growth showed unexpected parallels: early exponential elongation resembled primary morphogenesis, while later linear growth matched secondary morphogenesis. Comparing dark- vs light-grown hypocotyls and juvenile vs transition leaves showed that organ size was modulated by a trade-off between growth rate and duration of the scaling phase. Cellular-scale growth during early development was shown to influence final organ size, underscoring the need for early-stage measurements. This growth atlas provides benchmark values and a reference framework for interpreting mutant phenotypes, guiding experimental design, and advancing our understanding of growth regulation across 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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".