MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2311909731 · doi:10.6000/1927-5129.2016.12.20

Influence of Sugar, Ammonium Nitrate and Plant Growth Regulators on in vitro Flowering of Celosia argentea var. cristata

2016· article· en· W2311909731 on OpenAlex
Krupa-Ma kiewicz Marcelina, Mg osiek Oktawia

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Basic & Applied Sciences · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicFlowering Plant Growth and Cultivation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsShootSugarSucroseBiologyExplant cultureBotanyMurashige and Skoog mediumAmmoniumNitrateIn vitroAmmonium nitrateHorticultureChemistryFood scienceBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In vitro flowering is considered to be a complex process regulated by a vast of environmental and genetic factors. The present study describes the influence of sugar, ammonium nitrate and plant growth regulators on in vitroflowering from nodal explants of Celosia argentea var. cristata cultured for 6 weeks on basal MS medium under aseptic and light conditions. The addition to MS medium different concentrations of sucrose or ammonium nitrate did not influence on morphogenesis of Celosia plants. Among the plant growth regulators tested, supplementation with 1.0 mg/l KIN induced maximum number of new shoots (2.52). Flowering occurred on 100% of in vitro shoots cultured on modify MS medium supplemented with 16.50 and 8.25 g/l of NH4NO3 after 40 days.

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.

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)0.001
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 score0.170
Threshold uncertainty score0.145

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.184 · 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