Contrast Study of Bioeffects Between LFS and CPPU on the Tissue Culture of Siraitia Grosvenori(Swingle)C.Jeffrey in Vitro
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In order to improve the tissue culture technology of Siraitia grosvenorii (Swingle), stem cutting with single nod was used as explants, MS as basal medium and supplied with LFS or CPPU respectively. Results:(1)On the primary culture LFS 0.2(mg/L,as same as fallows) could induce the axillary bud of explants germinating and growing quickly, most of them could rooting, meanwhile the callus formation was controlled obviously during 25d cultured. But CPPU 0.02 could only induce a lout of callus formation, no bud germinated. (2)On the secondary culture for proliferation the bioactive of LFS to induce axillary bud germinating and plantlet rooting was enhanced by cooperation with NAA 0.1. At the same time on the help of NAA, CPPU also induced the axillary bud germinating and improved leaves growing bigger,however stem elongation and adventitious roots are strongly inhibited at the same time large numbers of callus are formde.
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".