MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1972782164 · doi:10.1021/bp049726f

Plant Cell Culture Monitoring Using an in Situ Multiwavelength Fluorescence Probe

2005· article· en· W1972782164 on OpenAlexafffund
Steve Hisiger, Mario Jolicœur

Bibliographic record

VenueBiotechnology Progress · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant tissue culture and regeneration
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsTryptamineFluorescenceNAD+ kinaseCatharanthus roseusTryptophanChemistryBiochemistryChromatographyEnzymeAmino acid

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A multiwavelength fluorescence probe is proposed for in situ monitoring of Eschscholtzia californica and Catharanthus roseus plant cell cultures. The potential of the probe as a tool for real-time estimation of biomass and production in secondary metabolites has been studied. The probe excitation range is 270-550 nm and the emission range is 310-590 nm, with a step of 20 nm for both excitation and emission filters. Many endogenous fluorophores such as NAD(P)H, riboflavins (riboflavin and derivatives such as FMN, FAD), tryptamine and tryptophan, and fluorescent secondary metabolites were analyzed simultaneously. NAD(P)H fluorescence signal (350/450 nm) showed to be an adequate signal for estimating cells activity. Riboflavins fluorescence signal (450/530 nm) followed C. roseus cell concentration both for the growth phase and after elicitation with jasmonic acid. Fluorescence from the alkaloids interfered with NAD(P)H signal during the production phase. For C. roseus, tryptophan, tryptamine, ajmalicine and serpentine were monitored by the probe. For E. californica, fluorescence from alkaloids overlapped with riboflavins preventing from using the probe to follow cell growth but global alkaloids production could be followed using the probe.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.571

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.243 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations19
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiotechnology ProgressSame topicPlant tissue culture and regenerationFrench-language works237,207