In vitro Plantlets Regeneration from Nodal Segments of Murici (Byrsonima gardneriana)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study aimed to develop efficient protocols for the in vitro micropropagation of Byrsonima gardneriana. Nodal segments were obtained from seedlings germinated in vitro with 60 days of life. These were inoculated in MS/2 supplemented with 87.64 µM of sucrose and solidified with 0.7% of agar, supplemented with different concentrations of cytokinin 6-benzylaminopurine (0.0; 2.0; 4.0 and 8.0 µM) associated with different concentrations of auxin, indole acetic acid (0.0; 0.5 and 1.0 µM) and naphthaleneacetic acid (0.0; 0.5 and 1.0 µM). The sprouting were individualized and transferred to MS/2 cultures with different concentrations of indole butyric acid (0.0; 1.0; 2.0 and 3.0 µM), and presence and absence of activated charcoal (1.0 g L-1). The use of concentrations from 2.0 to 4.0 µM 6-benzylaminopurine was efficient in the multiplication of B. gardneriana, given that, using concentrations above these, a decrease in this efficiency occurs. The use of auxin interfered negatively with the results. In vitro rooting occurs even in medium free of auxin. The activated charcoal was insufficient for rooting. The use of growth regulators 6-benzylaminopurine and indole butyric acid are efficient in micropropagation of B. gardneriana, however, further studies should be performed to optimize this protocol.
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) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
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.
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".