MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2131200595 · doi:10.1093/aob/mcj049

Effect of Growth Phase on Survival of Bromegrass Suspension Cells Following Cryopreservation and Abiotic Stresses

2006· article· en· W2131200595 on OpenAlexaff
Masaya Ishikawa, Mitsuteru Suzuki, Toshihide Nakamura, Tadashi Kishimoto, A.J. Robertson, Lawrence V. Gusta

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Botany · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant tissue culture and regeneration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCryopreservationBiologyOsmotic concentrationExponential growthVitrificationCryobiologyBotanyWater contentSuspension cultureHorticultureAndrologyCell cultureCell biologyEmbryoBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Cryopreservation is a practical method of preserving plant cell cultures and their genetic integrity. It has long been believed that cryopreservation of plant cell cultures is best performed with cells at the late lag or early exponential growth phase. At these stages the cells are small and non-vacuolated. This belief was based on studies using conventional slow prefreezing protocols and survival determined with fluorescein diacetate staining or 2,3,5-triphenyltetrazolium chloride assays. This classical issue was revisited here to determine the optimum growth phase for cryopreserving a bromegrass (Bromus inermis) suspension culture using more recently developed protocols and regrowth assays for determination of survival. METHODS: Cells at different growth phases were cryopreserved using three protocols: slow prefreezing, rapid prefreezing and vitrification. Stage-dependent trends in cell osmolarity, water content and tolerance to freezing, heat and salt stresses were also determined. In all cases survival was assayed by regrowth of cells following the treatments. KEY RESULTS: Slow prefreezing and rapid prefreezing protocols resulted in higher cell survival compared with the vitrification method. For all the protocols used, the best regrowth was obtained using cells in the late exponential or early stationary phase, whereas lowest survival was obtained for cells in the late lag or early exponential phase. Cells at the late exponential phase were characterized by high water content and high osmolarity and were most tolerant to freezing, heat and salt stresses, whereas cells at the early exponential phase, characterized by low water content and low osmolarity, were least tolerant. CONCLUSIONS: The results are contrary to the classical concept which utilizes cells in the late lag or early exponential growth phase for cryopreservation. The optimal growth phase for cryopreservation may depend upon the species or cell culture being cryopreserved and requires re-investigation for each cell culture. Stage-dependent survival following cryopreservation was proportionally correlated with the levels of abiotic stress tolerance in bromegrass cells.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.281

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.292
Teacher spread0.276 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations19
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of BotanySame topicPlant tissue culture and regenerationFrench-language works237,207