Claim · model-written summary
The authors recommend classifying the three species in different genera.
- Taxon
- Vitex doniana
Vitex donianae1 - Outcome
- earlier classification which separates the three species into different generae0
Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleTreatmentComparatorSettingDirectionValueQualifier
Organisms pictured · Representative pictures of the matched species, not figures from the paper.
Verbatim
e0“recommends the earlier classification which separates the three species into different genera”
e1“Vitex doniana, Gmelina arborea and Tectona grandis”
Title
Relationship between physicochemical parameters and zooplanktons in Karidna reservoir, Kaduna state
H. Haruna; H.I. Ashir Bayero Journal of Pure and Applied Sciences 2018. doi:10.4314/bajopas.v10i1.125s
Other claims from this paper (12)
- Observation Gmelina arborea had polygonal epidermal cells.
- Observation Vitex doniana had rectangular and irregular epidermal cells.
- Observation Tectona grandis had isodiametric and elongated epidermal cells.
- Observation Stomatal ontogeny was mesogenous in all three species.
- Observation Vitex doniana had anomocytic stomata.
- Observation Gmelina arborea had anisocytic and anomocytic stomata.
- Observation Tectona grandis had paracytic stomata.
- Observation Gmelina arborea was amphistomatic with scant adaxial stomata.
- Observation Vitex doniana was hypostomatic.
- Observation Tectona grandis was hypostomatic.
- Observation Stomata length and pore breadth did not significantly differ between Vitex doniana and Gmelina arborea.
- Observation Epidermal cell numbers and trichomes differed significantly among the three species.