Bibliographic record
Abstract
27. Acalypha leonii Baill. Bulletin Mensuel de la Société linnéenne de Paris II: 1197 (Baillon 1895b). — Type: Madagascar. Prov. Toamasina, Forêt d’Antsianaka, 14.XII.1882, L. Humblot 514 (lecto-, designated by Montero Muñoz et al. [2018a: 103]: P [P00513056]; isolecto-, K [K000186528], P [P00513055, P00513057, P00513058]). Acalypha leonii var. perrierana Leandri, Notulae Systematicae. Herbier du Muséum de Paris. Phanérogramie. Paris 10: 271 (Leandri 1942). — Type: Madagascar. Prov. Mahajanga, bassin du Bemarivo, versant NE, 100 m, 1912, H. Perrier de la Bâthie 9719 (lecto-, designated byMontero Muñoz et al. [2018a: 103]: P[P00513061]; isolecto-, P[P00513059, P00513060]). ICONOGRAPHY. — Fig. 46G. ETYMOLOGY. — The epithet honors French naturalist Léon Humblot (1852-1914). DISTRIBUTION AND HABITAT. — Endemic to Madagascar (Sava, Alaotra-Mangoro). Lowland evergreen moist forest and moist semi-deciduous forest. On basement rocks. Altitudinal range 100- 550 m (Fig. 45). PRELIMINARY CONSERVATION ASSESSMENT. — The EOO of Acalypha leonii is estimated to be 13 516 km 2 and its AOO 24 km 2, which is less than the 500 km 2 threshold of the B2 subcriterion of the Endangered category. This species grows mainly in moist evergreen forests (see assessment of A. emirnensis). All specimens of Acalypha leonii were collected in unprotected areas, and it occurs only in four locations. Due to its small AOO, the small number of locations, and ongoing habitat loss, A. leonii is assessed as Endangered (EN): EN B2ab(ii,iii,iv). MATERIAL EXAMINED. — 8 collections. Madagascar. Decary, R. 5554 (P[P00513172]); Gautier, L. LG 4003 (G[G00007294], K, P[P04786268]); Humbert, H. 24048 (P[P00513125], WAG[WAG.1578742]), 24208 (B[B100017325], G, K, MA[MA-01-00583961], NY,P[P00513123], WAG[WAG.1578531]); Humblot, L. 514 (K[K000186528], LD[LD1422440], P[P00513055, P00513056, P00513057, P00513058]); Perrier de la Bâthie, H. 9719 (P[P00513059, P00513060, P00513061]); Service Forestier Madagascar 27269-SF (P[P00324566]); Razakamalala, R. 5536 (MO[MO-3025029], P, TAN). REFERENCES. — Palacký (1907: 25); Pax & Hoffmann (1924: 112); Leandri (1942: 271); Leandri (1952); Govaerts et al. (2000: 72); Schatz (2001: 142); Montero Muñoz et al. (2018a: 103). DESCRIPTION Shrubs, evergreen, to 2 m tall, monoecious. Branches subglabrous, with some simple, appressed trichomes, glabrous when mature. Axillary buds subspherical, to 1 × 1.2 mm, perulate, perules 2, imbricate, chartaceous, blackish, glabrous. Stipules to 3 mm long, triangular-lanceolate, rigid, fleshy, midrib thick, margin ciliate. Petioles thick, canaliculate, 0.5-2.5(-3) cm long, glabrous. Leaf blades 7-10(-12.5) × 2-4(-6.5) cm, elliptic-lanceolate to subobovate, chartaceous; base obtuse to cuneate; apex acuminate, acumen to 20 mm long, rounded; margin crenate-serrate to subentire, slightly thickened, teeth rounded; upper and lower surfaces glabrous; venation pinnate, secondary veins 8-10 per side. Stipels absent. Inflorescences spiciform, androgynous and male, axillary. Androgynous inflorescences to 10 cm long, mostly male with short female segment; peduncle to 11 mm long, glabrous; rachis puberulent with short, curved, antrorse trichomes. Female segment to 3 cm long; bracts 1-4, sessile, enlarging in fruit to 5 × 6 mm, reniform, chartaceous, glabrous; margin deeply dentate, teeth c. 9, broadly triangular, rounded, central tooth not prominent; bracteoles absent. Male segment persistent, to 8 cm long; flowers glomerate; bracts to 0.5 mm diameter, orbicular, slightly fleshy, glabrous. Male inflorescences to 8 cm long; peduncle to 10 mm long, glabrous; rachis and bracts similar to those of androgynous inflorescences. Male flowers: pedicel to 1 mm long, sparsely hairy; buds to 0.8 mm diameter, sparsely hairy. Female flowers 1 per bract, sessile; sepals 3, to 1 mm long, ovate-triangular, ciliate and sparsely hairy; ovary c. 1 mm diameter, 3-lobed, papillose, papillae to 1 mm long, ending in sessile gland, surface sparsely hairy with simple, short trichomes; styles 3, to 3 mm long, connate at base, glabrous, each divided into c. 10 segments. Allomorphic flowers not seen. Capsules to 2.5 mm diameter, papillose, papillae to 1 mm long, surface sparsely hairy. Seeds too young to describe.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.028 | 0.007 |
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".