MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2036546440 · doi:10.1086/338824

<i>In Vitro</i>Phenotypic Variation in Larch Cotyledon Number

2002· article· en· W2036546440 on OpenAlexaff
Patrick von Aderkas

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Plant Sciences · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant tissue culture and regeneration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersUniversity of Chicago
KeywordsCotyledonBiologyEmbryoSomatic embryogenesisLarchHypocotylBotanyGerminationAbscisic acidCytokininSeedlingHorticultureEmbryogenesisAuxinBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Somatic embryos of hybrid larch (Larix × leptoeuropaea) have significantly fewer cotyledons per embryo than embryos of zygotic origin. They also have a much greater variance and range in cotyledon number (zero to 15) than do seed embryos (four to seven), as well as a greater number of phenotypes. Somatic embryos were matured on modified Murashige and Skoog’s (1962) medium supplemented with one of the following combinations of growth‐regulating substances: (1) 60 μM abscisic acid (ABA), (2) 2.2 μM benzyladenine (BA), (3) 60 μM ABA and 2.2 μM BA, or (4) a control medium containing neither plant growth regulator. Of these treatments, BA caused the greatest reduction in cotyledons per embryo. Embryos produced on different BA concentrations (0, 0.04, 0.4, 4.4, 44, and 444 μM) showed significant differences in cotyledon number per embryo as well as percentage of embryos with cotyledons. At higher concentrations, BA‐treated embryos had shorter hypocotyls and longer cotyledons than embryos produced at lower concentrations. At concentrations >4.4 μM, BA reduced the percentage of embryos able to initiate cotyledons. Precocious germination was reduced by concentrations of BA above 0.44 μM BA.

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 score0.204
Threshold uncertainty score0.149

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.249 · 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

Citations17
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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