Cryopreservation of <i>Pinus radiata</i> zygotic embryo cotyledons: effect of storage duration on adventitious shoot formation and plant growth after 2 years in the field
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This work is the first report of the cryopreservation of conifer cotyledons without cryoprotectants and their subsequent shoot regeneration and successful establishment of a field trial. Multiple genotypes of radiata pine (Pinus radiata D. Don) embryo cotyledons were stored in liquid nitrogen following a desiccation treatment. Cotyledons that had been stored in liquid nitrogen for 7, 14, and 28 days were compared with noncryopreserved cotyledons for adventitious shoot production, root formation on the shoots, and plant growth after 2 years in the field. Of the 72 genotypes tested, 79%87% of them produced shoots on at least one treatment and 59% of them produced shoots on all treatments. Rooting rates of shoots were not affected by treatment, with the cryopreserved treatments rooting as well as the noncryopreserved controls. Height growth of plants in the nursery was similar across all treatments after 2 years but was influenced by setting date. The higher genotype capture possible with adventitious methodologies, compared with that of somatic embryogenesis, and the preservation of juvenile characteristics while material is stored in liquid nitrogen make adventitious methods worthy of intensive study for possible commercial application.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".