Hi Torsten,
I agree that the plants share similar ideas. It is kind of similar to the text, which is different from one section to the other, while also sharing a basic idea.
Regarding scribes, for me personally the most important point is now to show that differences exist which cannot be explained by coincidence. I was fascinated by trying to find out whether there were different groups of plant illustrations. We opted for A vs. B because this was the highest level split we could think of.
Thank you for looking at the plants in detail, this kind of check is important. There are certainly some grey areas, which is to be expected when classifying so many different drawings.
So let's start with the daisies. We went through a number of iterations as we kept finding new things. Originally, our category for "daisies" was "daisy in cup": we had the impression that B's daisies were often inserted into something, or kind of floating above a "cup". At this stage, we had not noticed the existence of B-calyxes yet. This probably explains the table. We saw B's typical behavior as either inserting the daisy in/on another flower, or paired with a spiky structure (which we later called the B-calyx). You are, however, fully correct to point out the situation of You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. and You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. - as we mentioned, the system really struggles on certain bifolios around the 50's. It is probably not a coincidence that the two exceptions are found on the recto-verso of the same page.
I do think You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. shows typical "daisy behavior", namely a dotted heart surrounded by petals, in a place where you probably wouldn't expect it (some kind of thistle-type flower). For something kind of similar, see You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. .
Regarding "grass": we tried to differentiate between a property of the root (being hairy) or a feature of the terrain (shoots around the base of the stem). We approached both categories without knowing beforehand whether they would lean A or B or neither.
You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. : we classified this as a hairy root, since the hairs are also below the root and no specific attempt is made to make something grow around the stem. See especially the lines bottom right. Of the three examples you list, this one is certainly the closest, since much of the hair is on the top. However, the B-style emphasizes them around the base of the stem. You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. : this is a clear example of an all-round hairy root You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. : these are parallel lines "inside" the shape of the root. One might even argue that this root is not meant as hairy, but rather that the lines indicate a texture. (I have no preference for either, but it's certainly not the B-style of grass)
For "hairy roots", we had 15 for A, 2 for B, which normalizes to 6 for B. (Count not double checked since we did not include this feature).
You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. : fair remark, this root is hairy all around, and we debated whether this had grass or not. What finally pushed it over the edge is that the lines at the base of the stem are longer than those next to it on the root. So my impression was that both features "hairy" and "grass" were intended. You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. : this is a piece of terrain (it is even painted green) with "grass" on it. The roots themselves are smooth. The requirement of the base of the stems is also fulfilled. This one seems clear to me. You are not allowed to view links.
Register or
Login to view. : we also debated this one. But when we zoomed in on the area where the leaves meet the roots, we noticed that the lines in between are a separate layer.
So for each plant, we asked ourselves: are they trying to draw a hairy root (one category) or are they doing something entirely different, namely drawing "grass" as part of the terrain. The second category clearly leans B.
I'm not saying any of these have to be the way we classified them, but just trying to explain our reasoning to do so. I hope this clears up at lease a few places where we've been unclear.