MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2140295263 · doi:10.1139/x07-141

Somatic embryogenesis in Greek fir

2008· article· en· W2140295263 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jana Krajňáková, Dušan Gömöry, Hely Häggman

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant tissue culture and regeneration
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersKansainvälisen Liikkuvuuden ja Yhteistyön Keskus
KeywordsSucroseSomatic embryogenesisGerminationEmbryoBiologyMaltoseHorticultureBotanyAbscisic acidEmbryogenesisAndrologyAnimal scienceFood scienceBiochemistryCell biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To induce somatic embryogenesis of Greek fir, Abies cephalonica Loud., the influence of different cultivation media, sampling dates, and cold treatment storage were examined. The initiation frequencies ranged from 1% to 25%. The sampling date had a significant effect on the initiation of embryogenic cultures and a high frequency was observed within a 5 week window. The effect of cone storage, composition of initiation media, and the medium by storage interaction also remained nonsignificant after 3 and 10 months of proliferation growth. At the maturation phase, the highest tested concentrations of abscisic acid (ABA), 16 and 32 µmol/L, increased both the capability of embryogenic cell masses (ECMs) to produce embryos and the mean number of embryos. Of the two tested carbohydrates, maltose-containing media produced more embryos altogether (1943, on the average of 22.3 embryos per gram fresh mass) and 76% of the ECMs were able to produce embryos when compared with the corresponding values (152, on the average 3.0 embryos per gram fresh mass) and 15.3%, respectively, on sucrose-containing medium. However, 93.5% of embryos on maltose-containing medium died during the germination phase, whereas the corresponding percentage on sucrose-containing medium was 78.2%.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

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 integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations26
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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