Phyllotaxis
the spirals are counted, not admired
Concept

Meristem — where it appears

The growing tip where new organs are made, and the only place a phyllotactic pattern is decided. Everything below it is a record, which is why an experiment that intervenes has to intervene there and why a photograph of a mature plant settles less than it appears to.

Named by 13 essays across 4 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

The rule, 26 steps in, at a growth of 0.40. The next primordium goes where the repulsion is least — the marked minimum at 216°. Nothing in the rule refers to any particular angle.

The angle is an output

137.5° is not a constant of nature. It is where a rule settles — a rule that places each new element as far as it can from the ones already there, contains no reference to the golden ratio, and reaches the same answer from starting angles a hundred and sixty degrees apart.

emergence · Attractor The spiral counts four different divergence angles produce. Fibonacci counts come from one angle. The Lucas angle — which the same dynamical model reaches on a different branch — gives 47 and 76, and neither number is a Fibonacci number.

Fibonacci is a branch, not a law

Fibonacci counts come from one branch of the model. The Lucas branch — which the same rule reaches at a different growth rate — gives 47 and 76, and neither is a Fibonacci number. The sequence is a consequence of an angle rather than a property of plants.

wrong · Fibbranch A head of 200 primordia at a divergence of 137.51°. Nothing is placed by hand: the nth point sits at n·137.51° and radius √n. The closest any two points come is 1.60 of the mean spacing.

A head is a set of points

The nth primordium at n times an angle, and a radius of root n. Two lines of arithmetic produce a sunflower head, which is either remarkable or suspicious depending on how carefully the claim is stated — and stating it carefully is most of the work.

lattices · Lattice What the model settles on, against how fast the meristem grows. A broad golden branch, a transition, and then the two-whorl regime at exactly half a turn. 9 of 27 converged settings land within 4° of the golden angle; 15 land more than 20° away.

The bifurcation diagram

Sweep the one parameter of the rule and the settled angle traces a diagram — a broad golden branch, a transition, and a two-whorl regime at exactly half a turn. The famous constant is one branch of it, which is a more useful thing to know than the constant.

emergence · Bifurcation Two runs of the same rule from unrelated starting angles. Both settle at 137.0°, within 0.5° of the golden angle, from seeds 166° apart.

Droplets with no biology in them

Douady and Couder dripped magnetised ferrofluid into a dish of silicone oil, and got spiral phyllotaxis with Fibonacci parastichy numbers out of a system containing no cells, no genes and no plant. That is the strongest evidence the pattern is physics — and the clearest warning about what a model can claim.

emergence · Analogue Where this implementation stops converging. Below about G = 0.18 the settled angle wanders over 113° however long the run. That is the model's limit, not a fact about plants.

Where the model stops

Below a growth parameter of about 0.18 this implementation does not converge — the settled angle wanders over a hundred degrees however long the run. That is the range where the literature says the interesting behaviour lives, and it is worth a figure rather than a quietly chosen axis.

emergence · Modellimit Three disturbances, three places to get in. The rule reads its neighbours, builds a profile of the energy at every azimuth, takes the least of it, and records a position. field noise enters at the profile; jostle noise enters at the neighbours; placement noise enters at the record. Two of the three are upstream of the choice and can change which minimum is taken; the third is downstream and never can.

The noise that arrives through the neighbours

The two kinds of noise this site had were idealisations that bracket the rule's choice. The realistic disturbance is neither: a primordium is placed exactly, and then the organ grows, so by the time the next one forms its neighbours have moved. That is a third kind, and it is invisible in every measurement a plant offers.

mechanism · Noise entry The same lattice with no rule in it. A cylindrical lattice at a divergence of 137.826° and a rise of 0.005, built by placing node i at exactly i times the divergence and then displacing each azimuth independently by 0.5°. Its photograph is the photograph of the stem in the figure beside it and its parastichy pair is the same pair. The largest comb mean in it is 0.03 against a sampling band of 0.07, and the readout refuses.

A comb is evidence of a rule

Build the same lattice kinematically — every node at an exact multiple of the divergence, an independent error on each azimuth, no feedback anywhere — and the spectrum is empty. The photograph is identical and the parastichy pair is identical. The comb is not a property of the arrangement.

mechanism · Mechanism claims Only noise that arrives before the choice can change what is chosen. Intact runs only, from the whole amplitude sweep. Placement noise displaces the node after the rule has picked an azimuth: 44 runs, none of which changed branch at any amplitude that left a lattice. Field noise perturbs the energy profile the rule picks over, so it can move the minimum into a neighbouring gap: 1 of 66 did.

Where the noise gets in

Ninety runs of noise applied after the rule has chosen, and not one changes branch. Fifty-six of noise applied to the choice itself, and one does. Only a disturbance upstream of the decision can restructure which nodes are neighbours of which — which is what a branch is.

emergence · Noise entry Which neighbours decide where an element goes. Each line is one exponent: how much each shell of neighbours makes the energy profile vary around the circumference, divided by what the nearest shell contributes. At p = 0.5 the nearest shell leads the next by a factor of 1.1 and a node is placed against the whole neighbourhood at once. At p = 3 it leads by 9.7e+3, and a node is placed against its immediate neighbours — which is what a lattice is.

How far a primordium reaches

The placement rule's repulsion falls as an inverse cube because that is what two magnetised droplets do, and nothing about a plant supplies the exponent. Asking what it controls produced one tidy wrong answer and one measured right one — and the difference between them is the difference between a total and a variation.

emergence · The range of the interaction A rule too long-ranged makes no pattern; every shorter one makes the same pattern. Each dot is 4 runs from a coarse start at one exponent, separated by 0.2° of placement noise. Below p ≈ 1.1 the divergence scatters by tens of degrees, which is what an arbitrary sequence gives. From p = 1.25 to p = 8 — a sixfold range — every run ends on 8/13 with the scatter between 0.75° and 1.06°.

The exponent that barely matters

An unchecked claim, repeated since the first essays, held that the repulsion's falloff exponent hardly changes the answer. It could not be tested, because the function that would have taken it never passed one down. Tested at last, it is true on a disc — by three and a half degrees across a sixteenfold range — and on a stem it decides whether there is a pattern at all.

emergence · Falloff exponent Three cut-offs at the same nominal width of 3 spacings. The weight the interaction is multiplied by, against distance. They halve at 2.08 (exponential), 2.50 (gaussian), 3.00 (hard) spacings — so a rule described as "cut off at 3 spacings" is three different rules until the falloff is named. Every later figure is read in half-weight radii for that reason.

A neighbourhood is a hypothesis

Every simulation of this kind stops summing somewhere. The earlier work found that where it stops decides what pattern comes out — so the stopping place is not a detail of the program but a claim about how far a primordium's influence reaches, and it should be written down as one.

emergence · The range of the interaction The next organ moves for the last 13, and for no others. One row per organ removed, counted back from the tip of a stem at a rise of 0.005 whose counted pair is 8 and 13. Removing any of the last 13 moves the next organ by 2.6° to 167.6°; removing an older one moves it by at most 0.47°, which is under the azimuth grid. The boundary is at 13, and 13 is the larger parastichy number — so the experiment counts the spirals without measuring an angle.

An experiment a needle could run

For eight instalments the outstanding item has been a survey — photographs, a protractor, hundreds of specimens — and it has not been done. The intervention is a different kind of ask, and a cheaper one: a needle, one apex, and a yes-or-no per ablation. Here is what it would cost, what it would settle, and the four ways it could come out.

wrong · Ablation

Named alongside it

The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.

Divergence angleBranchThe placement ruleRepulsionPrimordiumFibonacciNoiseRiseAttractorBifurcationConvergenceCylinder

All concepts