In vitro somatic embryogenesis and plantlet regeneration from immature male inflorescence of adult dura and tenera palms of Elaeis guineensis (Jacq.)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We report here a method for plant regeneration through somatic embryogenesis from explants collected from immature male inflorescence of adult oil palm cultivated in India. Callus induction was successful from tissues of immature male inflorescence collected from both dura and tenera varieties of oil palm. A modified Y3 (Eeuwens) media supplemented with several additives and activated charcoal (3%) were used for the experiments. Out of four different auxin treatments, 4-amino-3,5,6-trichloro-2-pyridinecarboxylic acid (picloram) produced maximum callus induction (82%) and it was not significantly different from 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D) and a combination of 2,4-D + picloram. The callus induction obtained with auxin α-naphthalene acetic acid was only 54% and it was significantly low as compared to the other treatments. Highest embryogenesis was obtained with a combination of 2,4-D + picloram (4.9%) followed by picloram (3.4%). Genotypic variation in response to the same auxins was observed both for callus induction and embryogenesis. Callus induction and embryogenesis ranged from 42 to 72% and 6.8 to 9.35%, respectively in tenera. The formation of embryogenic calli was marked by the appearance of white to yellowish globular or nodular structures which subsequently formed clear somatic embryos. Somatic embryogenesis was asynchronous and at one time we could find different stages of embryogenesis like the globular, torpedo and the cotyledonary stages. The somatic embryos when exposed to light in the same basal media along with 6-benzyladenine (18 µM), abscisic acid (3.78 µM) and gibberellic acid (5.78 µM) regenerated into plantlets. To the best of our knowledge this is the first report o f callus induction and somatic embryogenesis from immature male inflorescence of oil palm.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".