Plant regeneration from sugar beet leaf protoplasts: analysis of shoots by DNA fingerprinting and restriction fragment length polymorphism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Shoots were regenerated from leaf protoplasts of cytoplasmic male sterile and male fertile diploid sugar beet (Beta vulgaris L.) genotypes. Protoplasts cultured in Murashige and Skoog medium supplemented with 5 µM naphthaleneacetic acid, 2 µM 6-benzylaminopurine, 100 µM n-propyl gallate, and diamine putrescine at concentrations of 50, 100, or 500 µM were able to synthesize a new cell wall and entered successive mitotic divisions leading to the formation of callus colonies. Shoots were obtained via organogenesis by continuous culture of calli on the same basal medium supplemented with either cytokinin alone, or with a combination of cytokinin and auxin. The regenerants of both lines were characterized with regard to ploidy, and the regenerants of the male sterile line were further characterized with regard to possible somaclonal variation and organization of two mitochondrial genes: atpA and atp6. Chromosome counting revealed that tetra-, hexa-, and octa-ploids were present among regenerants. Random amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD) analysis identified one somaclonal variant among 31 shoots tested, whereas hybridization with both mitochondrial probes showed no notable changes in the organization of mtDNA within these loci.Key words: Beta vulgaris L., protoplasts, regeneration, random amplified polymorphic DNA (RAPD), atpA, atp6.
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 | 0.001 |
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.
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".