MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2426892966 · doi:10.1385/1-59259-959-1:187

Clonal Propagation of Softwoods

2005· article· en· W2426892966 on OpenAlexaff
Trevor A. Thorpe, Indra S. Harry, Edward C. Yeung

Bibliographic record

VenueHumana Press eBooks · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant tissue culture and regeneration
Canadian institutionsSembiosys Genetics (Canada)University of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPlantletSomatic embryogenesisOrganogenesisBiologyExplant cultureBotanyShootAxillary budMicropropagationHorticulture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Softwoods or gymnosperms, which make up 60% of the forested areas of the world, are economically important as a source of lumber, pulp, and paper. Reforestation is a major activity worldwide and the potential benefits of using clonal planting stock have long been recognized. Tissue culture clonal methods or micropropagation is a newer approach that can be achieved by enhancing axillary bud breaking, production of adventitious buds (organogenesis), and somatic embryogenesis. Plantlet production via organogenesis requires at least four stages: (1) bud induction on the explant, (2) shoot development and multiplication, (3) rooting of developed shoots, and (4) hardening of plantlets. Similarly, the production of plantlets via somatic embryogenesis, which has the potential to produce a larger number of plantlets, and in a shorter period of time, also requires several stages. These include (1) induction, maintenance, and proliferation of embryogenic tissue; (2) maturation (both morphological and physiological) of somatic embryos; and (3) germination and conversion of the somatic embryos. In this chapter, plantlet production via organogenesis from seedling and adolescent/mature explants and somatic embryogenesis from immature and mature seeds of white spruce (Picea glauca) are outlined.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.003

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHumana Press eBooksSame topicPlant tissue culture and regenerationFrench-language works237,207