Optimization of Protocols for In Vitro Regeneration of Sugarcane<i> (Saccharum officinarum)</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sugarcane contributes 60–70% of annual sugar production in the world. Somaclonal variation has potential to enhance genetic variation present within a species. Present study was done to optimize an in vitro propagation protocol for sugarcane. The experiments included four varieties, 9 callus induction media, 27 regeneration media, and 9 root induction media under two-factor factorial CRD. Data were recorded on callus induction, embryogenic callus formation, shoot elongation (cm), root induction, and plant regeneration. Statistically significant differences existed between genotypes and treatments for callus induction (%), embryogenic callus formation (%), shoot elongation (cm), root induction, and plant regeneration (%). All parameters showed dependency on genotypes, culture media, and their interaction. Highest callus induction (95%) embryogenic callus formation (95%) was observed in callus induction media 5. Highest plantlet regeneration (98.9%) capacity was observed in regeneration media 11 whereas maximum shoot elongation (12.13 cm) and root induction (8.32) were observed in rooting media 4. <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M1"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mrow><mml:mi>G</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn fontstyle="italic">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math> showed best response for all traits and vice versa for <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M2"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mrow><mml:mi>G</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn fontstyle="italic">4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math>. Hence it was concluded that <mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M3"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mrow><mml:mi>G</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mn fontstyle="italic">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math>, callus induction media 5, regeneration media 11, and rooting media 4 are the best conditions for in vitro propagation of sugarcane.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".