Improving initiation, genotype capture, and family representation in somatic embryogenesis of Pinus radiata by a combination of zygotic embryo maturity, media, and explant preparation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The principal aim of this investigation was to improve somatic embryogenesis initiation and to enhance representation of families and genotypes within those families of Pinus radiata D. Don. A total of 19 open-pollinated seed families, many with unrelated and weakly related parents, were tested. Optimum stage of cone maturity for initiation success was tested by five collections made at 1 week intervals, spanning the developmental period from pro-embryo to cotyledonary embryos. Two media were compared; embryo-development media (EDM6) and a modified Litvay medium (Glitz). Two zygotic embryo explant-preparation techniques were tested; embryos with retained megagametophytes and excised embryos. Proliferating embryogenic tissues were obtained from all four treatments (2850 explants per treatment, 570 per collection time) for the 19 families. The best initiation rates were achieved with a combination of Glitz medium with excised zygotic embryos, with 55% of explants from all collections and all families combined giving rise to proliferating embryogenic tissue. At the optimal collection time for each of the families, this treatment gave a range of 47%–97% initiation success with an average of 70% per family.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".