MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2408255659 · doi:10.1007/978-1-61737-988-8_21

Genetic Transformation Protocols Using Zygotic Embryos as Explants: An Overview

2010· review· en· W2408255659 on OpenAlexaff
Muhammad Tahir, Ejaz A. Waraich, Claudio Stasolla

Bibliographic record

VenueMethods in molecular biology · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant tissue culture and regeneration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExplant cultureTransformation (genetics)BiologyZygoteEmbryoSelection (genetic algorithm)GenomeMaternal to zygotic transitionComputational biologyGeneBotanyGeneticsEmbryogenesisComputer scienceIn vitroArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Genetic transformation of plants is an innovative research tool which has practical significance for the development of new and improved genotypes or cultivars. However, stable introduction of genes of interest into nuclear genomes depends on several factors such as the choice of target tissue, the method of DNA delivery in the target tissue, and the appropriate method to select the transformed plants. Mature or immature zygotic embryos have been a popular choice as explant or target tissue for genetic transformation in both angiosperms and gymnosperms. As a result, considerable protocols have emerged in the literature which have been optimized for various plant species in terms of transformation methods and selection procedures for transformed plants. This article summarizes the recent advances in plant transformation using zygotic embryos as explants.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.005

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 head0.129
GPT teacher head0.496
Teacher spread0.367 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations4
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMethods in molecular biology→Same topicPlant tissue culture and regeneration→French-language works237,207→