MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2100063867 · doi:10.1002/bit.21543

A predictive nutritional model for plant cells and hairy roots

2007· article· en· W2100063867 on OpenAlexaff
M. Cloutier, Edith Bouchard-Marchand, Pascal Perrier

Bibliographic record

VenueBiotechnology and Bioengineering · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant nutrient uptake and metabolism
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCatharanthus roseusDaucus carotaSuspension cultureCell cultureKineticsIntracellularBotanyBiologyPlant cellBiochemistryChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A structured nutritional model is proposed to describe growth and nutritional behavior of Eschscholtzia californica suspension cells and Catharanthus roseus and Daucus carota hairy roots in in vitro culture. The model describes the cells specific growth rate from concentration of intracellular nutrients such as inorganic phosphate (Pi), nitrogen sources (NO(3) (-) and NH(4) (+)) and sugars. Two-level Michaelis-Menten kinetics are used to describe Pi and NO(3) (-) uptake and simple Michaelis-Menten kinetics for description of sugars uptake. Model parameters for each cell line were calibrated using data from batch cultures. The predictive capacity of the model was tested using data from medium exchange hairy root cultures. The model describes growth and nutritional behavior for the cell and hairy root lines. A sensitivity analysis was performed to identify critical model parameters and effect of initial conditions. The cell and hairy roots lines are also compared from their kinetic parameters. The kinetic model is efficient for describing and predicting growth and nutritional behaviors of suspension cells and hairy roots.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.175 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations33
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiotechnology and BioengineeringSame topicPlant nutrient uptake and metabolismFrench-language works237,207