MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2036163399 · doi:10.5539/ijb.v2n1p127

A Rapid and Simple Method for Brassica Napus Floral-Dip Transformation and Selection of Transgenic Plantlets

2010· article· en· W2036163399 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Juan Li, Xiao‐Li Tan, Fuge Zhu, Jingjing Guo

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Biology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant tissue culture and regeneration
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Key Research and Development Program of ChinaJiangsu University
KeywordsBrassicaAgrobacterium tumefaciensAgrobacteriumTransformation (genetics)BiologySelection (genetic algorithm)InflorescenceTransgeneBiotechnologyBotanyHorticultureComputer scienceGeneticsGeneArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The floral-dip method of transformation by immersion of inflorescences in a suspension of Agrobacterium was appliedin the Brassica napus transformation, but it involves a number of relatively time-consuming and laborious steps,including manipulating an Agrobacterium tumefaciens culture and aseptic procedures for the selection of plant linesharboring antibiotic-selection markers. It calls for a long time to prepare the buffered media. To circumvent thesebottlenecks, we have developed a rapid and simple method. We find that Brassica napus can be transformed by dippingdirectly into an Agrobacterium tumefaciens culture supplemented with surfactant, eliminating the need for mediaexchange to a buffered solution. We report a method of transformant selection by soaking seeds with antibiotic. Thesemethods save time and money, and reduce the possibility of contamination.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.005

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

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

Citations32
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of BiologySame topicPlant tissue culture and regenerationFrench-language works237,207