The renaissance and enlightenment of Marchantia as a model system.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The liverwort Marchantia polymorpha has been utilized as a model for biological studies since the 18th century. In the past few decades, there has been a Renaissance in its utilization in genomic and genetic approaches to investigating physiological, developmental, and evolutionary aspects of land plant biology. The reasons for its adoption are similar to those of other genetic models, e.g. simple cultivation, ready access via its worldwide distribution, ease of crossing, facile genetics, and more recently, efficient transformation, genome editing, and genomic resources. The haploid gametophyte dominant life cycle of M. polymorpha is conducive to forward genetic approaches. The lack of ancient whole-genome duplications within liverworts facilitates reverse genetic approaches, and possibly related to this genomic stability, liverworts possess sex chromosomes that evolved in the ancestral liverwort. As a representative of one of the three bryophyte lineages, its phylogenetic position allows comparative approaches to provide insights into ancestral land plants. Given the karyotype and genome stability within liverworts, the resources developed for M. polymorpha have facilitated the development of related species as models for biological processes lacking in M. polymorpha.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".