MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2011237747 · doi:10.1134/s1021443709040141

Effects of donor plant environmental conditions on immature embryo cultures derived from worldwide origin wheat genotypes

2009· article· en· W2011237747 on OpenAlexaff
Nevena Mitić, Dejan Dodig, Radomirka Nikolić, Slavica Ninković, D. Vinterhalter, Branka Vinterhalter

Bibliographic record

VenueRussian Journal of Plant Physiology · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant tissue culture and regeneration
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Biological Sciences
FundersScience and Engineering Research Board
KeywordsBiologyAnthesisCallusGenotypeEmbryoPlant physiologyHorticultureBotanyAgronomyCultivarGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The influence of donor plant growth conditions in years 2003, 2004, and 2005 on tissue culture response (TCR) traits of 96 wheat genotypes was evaluated. Immature embryos, collected 12–15 days after anthesis from field-grown plants, were cultured on Murashige and Skoog medium containing 2 mg/l 2,4-D followed by their transfer to a growth regulator-free medium. Donor plants growth in a season 2003 characterized by drought and heat stress, as compared to favorable growth seasons 2004 and 2005, resulted in a increased variability and a decreased percentage of callus formation and the number of regenerating calli and plants regenerated per embryo in all genotypes, except genotype Florida that exhibited a significantly increased number of regenerating calli in 2003. The reduction rate of regenerating callus formation depended on genotype, and it was the highest in Magnif 41, NS66/92, and Mexico 3. The results suggest that the impact of donor plant growth conditions on TCR traits can be as large as the effect of the genotype, which should be taken into account when planning transformation work with wheat.

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 score0.090
Threshold uncertainty score0.472

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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Citations6
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRussian Journal of Plant PhysiologySame topicPlant tissue culture and regenerationFrench-language works237,207