Assessing The Effect of Naphthalene Acetic Acid and 6-Benzylaminopurine on<i> In Vitro</i> Micropropagation of Potato (<i>Solanum tuberosum</i> L.) and Estimation of Secondary Metabolites in <i>In Vitro</i> Micropropagated Shoots
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The effect of Naphthalene acetic acid (NAA) and 6-Benzylaminopurine (BAP) was investigated on in vitro micropropagation of potato (Solanum tuberosum L.) and secondary metabolites of in vitro micropropagated shoots were also estimated. Eight micropropagation media containing different level of NAA and BAP were studied and the effect of NAA and BAP on in vitro micropropagated shoots was assessed. However, in this research study, medium MPm 7 having 2.75 mg/l BAP was proved to be best for giving maximum number of shoots per explant in both genotypes to be studied. The genotype, PRI-Red yielded maximum number of shoots on this medium thus these in vitro micropropagated shoots were subjected to phytochemical analyses and were compared with shoots of intact plant (field grown) for secondary metabolites viz., alkaloids, flavonide and total polyphenolic contents. In phytochemical analyses, no alkaloids were not detected in both in vitro micropropagated shoots and shoots of intact plant while both plants showed positive test for presence of polyphenolics. Shoots of intact plant contained higher amount of total polyphenolics (3.7 GAE mg/g fresh wt.) as compared to in vitro micropropagated shoots (2.8 GAE mg/g fresh wt.). However, slightly higher amount of flavonide were detected in in vitro micropropagated shoots (1.8 mg/g) than shoots of intact plant (1.6 mg/g).
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".