Effects of culture medium and supplementation on seed germination, protocorm formation and regeneration of some Phalaenopsis hybrids
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An efficient protocol is suggested for in vitro culture of five Phalaenopsis hybrids obtained by hand-cross-pollination of three commercial hybrids Calgary, Ankara, and Kendall. Four nutrient media- namely half-strength Murashige and Skoog, Knudson, Phytamax containing activated charcoal, and Mitra– once supplemented (with coconut water, peptone, or both), and once without any supplement were considered as the experimental and control groups of the study which were then compared and evaluated for seed germination and protocorm formation. All of the seeds of hybrids H and N were germinated on half-strength Murashige and Skoog medium supplemented with peptone. To evaluate plant regeneration rate, three different media including half-strength Murashige and Skoog, Viking-Ship containing 2.75gr/L NPK (10-20-30), and Hyponex containing [1gr/L NPK (20-20-20)+1gr/L NPK (6.5-6-19)] were compared. The maximum number of healthy plantlets, roots per plantlet, and leaves per plantlet were induced in the half-strength Murashige and Skoog medium. Around 93% of the plants produced in vitro were able to establish ex vitro. The obtained results showed that, the use of the half-strength Murashige and Skoog medium is well suited for the mass propagation of Phalaenopsis.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".