MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2525033910 · doi:10.33915/etd.2558

Synthetic seed production for germplasm storage of Hydrastis canadensis L. (Goldenseal)

2007· dissertation· en· W2525033910 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Satyaprakash R. Settipalli

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPlant tissue culture and regeneration
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPropaguleCallusBiologyGermplasmShootBotanyEndangered speciesHorticulturePopulationHabitatEcologyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Goldenseal (Hydrastis canadensis L.) is an important medicinal plant, native to Canada and Eastern United States, used as an antibiotic, anticonvulsant and in treatments for inflammations and dyspepsia. Over collection of wild population and native habitat destruction has lead the species to be listed as an endangered species in the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), Appendix II. This brought a revived interest in conservation of germplasm.;Calcium alginate solid and hollow bead encapsulation protocols were evaluated. Shoot and callus propagules were encapsulated in calcium alginate solid bead (supplemented with stage II nutrient media) and hollow bead (no nutrient supplements) and were stored at 25°C and 5°C for either 4, 8 or 12 weeks. Best regeneration and viability were observed in 2.5% alginate concentrated solid shoot propagules that were stored at 5°C. By the end of 6 weeks of sub culturing 100% regeneration was achieved. Reduced (10%) regeneration was observed in callus propagules stored at 5°C, and all the callus propagules stored at 25°C were necrotic.

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)0.000
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0020.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.251 · 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

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPlant tissue culture and regeneration→French-language works237,207→