Taxonomy, morphology and cytology of Micranthes virginiensis (Michaux) Small (Saxifragales, Saxifragaceae), new chromosome counts for Micranthes and description of a new Micranthes species from the south-eastern USA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Micranthes virginiensis (Saxifragaceae) is an herbaceous, flowering plant species native to eastern North America with a range extending from the Gulf of Mexico into Canada. This broad range, known from previous studies to contain individuals with varying chromosome numbers and morphological variation outside of the current formal description, indicates the need for a re-examination of the taxonomy of this species. Some populations in south-eastern Appalachia display intermediate traits between M. virginiensis and the peripatric congener M. careyana and have unresolved phylogenetic placement, raising the possibility of hybridisation. This study explored hypotheses of hybridisation and undescribed taxa within M. virginiensis , based on morphometric and chromosome data collected from samples across Eastern North America. Floral, fruit and leaf measurements were analysed to investigate morphological variation across the species’ range. Chromosome counts from south-eastern U.S.A. congener populations of M. careyana , M. palmeri and M. petiolaris all showed diploidy (2 n = 20), representing the first known chromosome counts for these species. Tetraploidy and unique floral morphology in two populations of the Blue Ridge Escarpment of SC, where the distribution of M. virginiensis and M. careyana abut, indicate an undescribed species, possibly of hybrid origin. Other tetraploid populations in the south-eastern USA showed no morphological differences from diploid M. virginiensis , suggesting autopolyploidy. In addition, we document a trend of decreased reproductive investment with increasing elevation within M. virginiensis. Overall, the taxonomic boundaries across the broad range of M. virginiensis proved intact, aside from the escarpment tetraploid species. Here, we describe the new escarpment species, Micranthes scopularum Hall, Lanning & Mathews and provide a complete list of synonyms of M. virginiensis , in which we designate two lectotypes and one neotype.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".