MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2361604270

Study on Breaking Hard Seed Effect of Different Treat Methods for Melilotoides Ruthenica Strain 90-36

2011· article· en· W2361604270 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yun Jin-feng

Bibliographic record

VenueSeed · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant tissue culture and regeneration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGerminationStrain (injury)Liquid nitrogenHorticultureBiologyMaterials scienceChemistryAnatomy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hard seed percentage of Melilotoides ruthenica strain 90-36 is 41%.Treated the seeds with sand paper,KNO3,KMnO4,HCl,NaOH,H2O2,H2SO4,GA,high temperature,hot water,low temperature and liquid nitrogen.The results showed that 98% H2SO4 treated 25 to 60min,the germination percentage could increase to 90% or so,the hard seeds percentage decreased under 8%.Treated with sand paper could increase the germination percentage to 84%,and decreased the hard seeds percentage to zero.Besides,treated with 30% H2O2 40min,400mg/L GA 24h,70℃ high temperature 0.5h or 0.3% KMnO4 2h,all could partly breaking the hard seed of Melilotoides ruthenica strain90-36.

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 score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.428

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.288 · 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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSeedSame topicPlant tissue culture and regenerationFrench-language works237,207