MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2064024790 · doi:10.1139/x99-228

Transient<i>uidA</i>gene expression in electroporated cotyledonary protoplasts of<i>Pinus nigra</i>ssp.<i>salzmannii</i>and in bombarded cotyledons

2000· article· en· W2064024790 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Marián López, Jaime M. Humara, Roberto Rodríguez, Ricardo J. Ordás

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant tissue culture and regeneration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProtoplastElectroporationBiologyReporter geneGene expressionMolecular biologyGenePromoterChimeric geneGUS reporter systemCauliflower mosaic virusTransgeneBotanyGeneticsGenetically modified crops

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We have developed a method for the routine isolation of Pinus nigra Arn. ssp. salzmannii (Dunal) Franco protoplasts. The optimized electroporation conditions for uidA gene (gene for beta-glucuronidase) expression in protoplasts from cotyledons excised from 8-day-old seedlings were determined using an exponential pulse wave generator for gene transfer. The protoplasts were electroporated with plasmids containing the chimeric uidA gene under the control of several promoters, and in parallel, cotyledons were bombarded with the same constructs using a biolistic gun. Both techniques confirmed that gene expression was higher when controlled by the sunflower polyubiquitin gene promoter than by the cauliflower mosaic virus CaMV35S promoter, whereas the rice actin and maize alcohol dehydrogenase promoters resulted in lower uidA expression levels, as determined fluorometrically. In this study, the electroporation procedure has been more effective than the particle bombardment procedure to determine the promoter strength on transient gene expression in P. nigra.

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)0.000
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.997
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.254 · 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
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

Citations12
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest Research→Same topicPlant tissue culture and regeneration→French-language works237,207→