<i>Agrobacterium tumefaciens</i>-mediated transformation of corn (<i>Zea mays</i>L.) multiple shoots
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An Agrobacterium tumefaciens-mediated corn transformation method based on multiple shoot tissue cultures was developed, which is effective with a variety of corn inbred lines and standard binary vectors. Six factors that affected the success of corn transformation were tested, including A. tumefaciens strain, corn genotype, tissue culture growth stage, medium composition, co-culture temperature and surfactant treatment. Agropine-type bacteria (EHA 101 and AGL 1) were eightfold more effective than octopine-type strain for corn multi-shoot tissues transformation. The average frequency of Glucuronidase (GUS)-positive explants obtained from 14 corn genotypes ranged from 36% to 76%. L-proline (0.7 g L−1) in the co-culture medium apparently improved the frequency of transformation. The newly initiated multi-shoot tissues were most responsive to Agrobacterium infection. A positive correlation was found between multi-shoot tissue susceptibility to Agrobacterium and the proportion of cells in G1 phase. Transformants were identified by reverse transcription Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) and by southern blot hybridization assays. The frequency of transformants was approximately 2% based on the number of multi-shoot explants co-cultivated with Agrobacterium.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it