Shoot Regeneration and Plantlet Formation by Cascade Huckleberry, Mountain Huckleberry, and Oval-leaf Bilberry on a Zeatin-containing Nutrient Medium
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A plant regeneration protocol was developed for cascade huckleberry ( Vaccinium deliciosum ), mountain huckleberry ( V. membranaceum ), and oval-leaf bilberry ( V. ovalifolium ) clones. The effects of zeatin concentrations (0, 4.6, 9.1, and 13.7 μM) and explant type (leaf or stem segment) on adventitious shoot regeneration were studied on a nutrient medium of low ionic concentration. Adventitious bud and shoot regeneration was greatly influenced by clone, explant type, and zeatin concentration. Zeatin at 9.1 to 13.7 μM supported the best bud and shoot regeneration. At low concentrations (2.3 to 4.6 μM), zeatin enhanced shoot elongation and produced usable shoots after one additional subculture. The three clones differed significantly with respect to multiplication rate of adventitious shoots. Oval-leaf bilberry and mountain huckleberry clones produced six to seven 5-cm-long shoots per explant and cascade huckleberry clone produced five 3-cm-long shoots per explant, when 2.3 μM zeatin was used in the medium. Increasing the concentration of zeatin in the culture medium increased shoot number per explant, but decreased shoot height, leaf number per shoot, and shoot vigor. Proliferated shoots were rooted on the same medium but without any plant growth regulators (PGRs). Rooted plantlets were transferred to a 2 peat:1 perlite (v/v) medium for acclimatization and eventually established in the greenhouse with 75% to 90% survival rate. This in vitro protocol will be useful for micropropagation, in vitro selection, and genetic manipulation of Vaccinium species.
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 | 0.000 |
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".