In Vitro Micropropagation of Jatropha curcas L. from Bud Aggregates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Entire plants were regenerated from nodes explants of Jatropha curcas L. following a procedure of bud aggregate induction on MS (Murashige and Skoog) medium supplemented with 25 mg.l-1 citric acid, 12.2 mg.l-1 adenine sulfate, 15 mg.l-1 L-arginine, 2.46 µM IBA (indole-3-butyric acid), 30 g.l-1 sucrose and 7 g.l-1 of agar, and enriched with different balances of BA (benzyladenine) and L-glutamine. The histological studies performed on aggregates showed that the buds result from both the development of axillary buds and adventitious budding starting from underlying tissues of the explant. The culture medium containing 6.65 µM BA and 25 mg.l‑1 L-glutamine gave the best results with an average of 64 buds per aggregate after three weeks for all accessions tested. The buds developed into shoots when placed in an MS medium supplemented with 2.21 µM BA, 5.70 µM IAA (indole-3-acetic acid) and 15 mg.l-1 L‑arginine. These shoots were isolated and then rooted in MS containing 2.46 µM of IBA, 2% sucrose and 0.7% agar. The entire process took 13 weeks with a 98% survival rate in terms of plantlets acclimatization. We obtained a multiplication rate of 13 buds per explant and per subculture which is the double of those obtained in other recent works based on the micropropagation of J. curcas from node explants. This protocol is economically more profitable.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".