MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2756203952 · doi:10.5539/ijb.v9n4p27

Artificial Cultivation System for Gastrodia spp. and Identification of Associated Mycorrhizal Fungi

2017· article· en· W2756203952 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Chie Shimaoka, Hirokazu Fukunaga, Seishu Inagaki, Shinichiro Sawa

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Biology · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBiological and pharmacological studies of plants
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiologyOrchidaceaeMycorrhizal fungiBotanyGerminationFungusGastrodia elataHorticultureInoculation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Orchidaceae are the largest and most diverse family of flowering plants on earth, and include some of the most important horticultural plants. While mycoheterotrophic orchids belonging to the genus Gastrodia are known to be provided with carbon through mycorrhizal fungi, the relationship between the plants and fungi is poorly understood. Furthermore, it is challenging to cultivate Gastrodia spp. in vitro. In this study, we present an efficient method for germinating Gastrodia pubilabiata (Gp), Gastrodia nipponica (Gn), and Gastrodia confusa (Gc) plants in vitro, which results in the production of a protocorm and tuber, as under natural conditions. The Gp and Gc plants produced flowers 126 and 124 days after germination, respectively, and set seed under our artificial conditions. In addition, Gp plants flowered up to three times a year from a single tuber. Using our artificial cultivation system, we identified some of the mycorrhizal fungi associated with these plants. Gastrodia spp. appear to obtain carbon from many kinds of mycorrhizal fungi. Our artificial cultivation method is a rapid and efficient means of growing Gastrodia spp. In addition to having applications in research and commercial nurseries, this method could be used to conserve Gastrodia spp. in ex situ, many of which are endangered.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.663
Threshold uncertainty score0.156

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.057
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.306 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations8
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of BiologySame topicBiological and pharmacological studies of plantsFrench-language works237,207